Journals / Black Sea Journal of Agriculture / 2026 / Cilt: 9 Sayı: 4

Smart Farming Adoption in Kırıkkale: A Study on Grain Producers

Melih Cevdet Pehlivanlı(ONDOKUZ MAYIS ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0000-8765-3060
Gürkan Alp Kağan Gürdil(ONDOKUZ MAYIS ÜNİVERSİTESİ, ZİRAAT FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0001-7764-3977
Dilara Gerdan Koç(ANKARA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-2705-299X
Bahadır Demirel(ERCİYES ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-2650-1167
Pages
532–542
Publication Date
2026-07-15
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results suggest that addressing digital infrastructure, advisory-training services, and shared machinery/technology parks together at the provincial scale may help disseminate smart agriculture.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, the aim was to determine the awareness level, perceptions, adoption intentions, and barriers to adoption regarding smart agriculture practices among farmers engaged in maize and wheat cultivation in Kırıkkale province.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In the research, frequency data from a 15-question questionnaire were used; univariate descriptive statistics (frequency-percentage), weighted means for Likert items, and multiple-response frequencies for multiple-response questions were reported.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The results suggest that addressing digital infrastructure, advisory-training services, and shared machinery/technology parks together at the provincial scale may help disseminate smart agriculture.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Smart agriculture · Precision agriculture · Digitalisation

Abstract

In this study, the aim was to determine the awareness level, perceptions, adoption intentions, and barriers to adoption regarding smart agriculture practices among farmers engaged in maize and wheat cultivation in Kırıkkale province. In the research, frequency data from a 15-question questionnaire were used; univariate descriptive statistics (frequency-percentage), weighted means for Likert items, and multiple-response frequencies for multiple-response questions were reported. The findings show that a significant proportion of participants had heard of the concept of “smart agriculture,” but awareness remained low for component technologies such as IoT. While technologies such as automatic irrigation and drones stand out as the most well-known and widely used applications, it was observed that the proportion of those actually using smart agriculture technology was limited. The main barriers to adoption are high cost and limited information, and the most critical policy topics for wider diffusion are training and awareness programmes and financial incentives. The results suggest that addressing digital infrastructure, advisory-training services, and shared machinery/technology parks together at the provincial scale may help disseminate smart agriculture.

Özet

In this study, the aim was to determine the awareness level, perceptions, adoption intentions, and barriers to adoption regarding smart agriculture practices among farmers engaged in maize and wheat cultivation in Kırıkkale province. In the research, frequency data from a 15-question questionnaire were used; univariate descriptive statistics (frequency-percentage), weighted means for Likert items, and multiple-response frequencies for multiple-response questions were reported. The findings show that a significant proportion of participants had heard of the concept of “smart agriculture,” but awareness remained low for component technologies such as IoT. While technologies such as automatic irrigation and drones stand out as the most well-known and widely used applications, it was observed that the proportion of those actually using smart agriculture technology was limited. The main barriers to adoption are high cost and limited information, and the most critical policy topics for wider diffusion are training and awareness programmes and financial incentives. The results suggest that addressing digital infrastructure, advisory-training services, and shared machinery/technology parks together at the provincial scale may help disseminate smart agriculture.

🔖

Cite This Article

Pehlivanlı, M. C., Gürdil, G. A. K., Koç, D. G., Demirel, B. (2026). Smart Farming Adoption in Kırıkkale: A Study on Grain Producers. Black Sea Journal of Agriculture, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 4, 532–542. https://doi.org/10.47115/bsagriculture.1931863

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Alotibi, Y. S. (2025). A socio-technical agent-based simulation model for predicting smart agriculture adoption dynamics. Scientific Reports, 15(1), 43536. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-27523-7
  2. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
  3. Ercan, Ş., Öztep, R., Güler, D., & Saner, G. (2019). Tarım 4.0 ve Türkiye’de uygulanabilirliğinin değerlendirilmesi. Tarım Ekonomisi Dergisi, 25(2), 259–265. https://doi.org/10.24181/tarekoder.650762dav
  4. FAO. (2025). Digital technologies for agriculture in Türkiye: A review. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
  5. Guldal, H. T., Sanli, H., & Turker, M. (2025). The path to smart farming: Profiling farmers' adoption of technologies in Türkiye. Agricultural Economics – Czech, 71(5), 229–241. https://doi.org/10.17221/401/2023-AGRICECON
  6. Keskin, M., & Sekerli, Y. E. (2016). Awareness and adoption of precision agriculture in the Cukurova region of Turkey. Agronomy Research, 14(4), 1307–1320.
  7. Keskin, M., Sekerli, Y. E., Say, S. M., & Topcu, M. (2018). Farmers’ experiences with GNSS-based tractor auto guidance in Adana Province of Turkey. Journal of Agricultural Faculty of Gaziosmanpasa University (JAFAG), 35(2), 172–181. https://doi.org/10.13002/jafag4421
  8. Kroupová, Z. Ž., Aulová, R., Rumánková, L., Bajan, B., Čechura, L., Šimek, P., & Jarolímek, J. (2025). Drivers and barriers to precision agriculture technology and digitalisation adoption: Meta-analysis of decision choice models. Precision Agriculture, 26(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11119-024-10213-1
  9. Osrof, H. Y., Tan, C. L., Angappa, G., Yeo, S. F., & Tan, K. H. (2023). Adoption of smart farming technologies in field operations: A systematic review and future research agenda. Technology in Society, 75, 102400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102400
  10. Özoğul, G. (2025). Evaluation of Information and Communication Technology Utilisation in Turkish Agriculture. International Journal of Agriculture, Environment and Food Sciences, 9 (Special Issue), 25–26. https://doi.org/10.31015/2025.si.13
  11. Pandeya, S., Gyawali, B. R., & Upadhaya, S. (2025). Factors influencing precision agriculture technology adoption among small-scale farmers in Kentucky and their implications for policy and practice. Agriculture, 15(2), 177. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15020177
  12. Raj, M., & Prahadeeswaran, M. (2025). Revolutionizing agriculture: a review of smart farming technologies for a sustainable future. Discover Applied Sciences, 7(9), 937. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-025-07561-6
  13. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.
  14. Trendov, N. M., Varas, S., & Zeng, M. (2019). Digital technologies in agriculture and rural areas: Status report. FAO.
  15. Yildirim, Y. E., Tas, I., & Berk, F. (2025). The use of climate and soil-based digital applications on irrigation management in Turkey. 4th World Irrigation Forum (WIF4), Kuala Lumpur.