The use of information and communication technology (ICT) has become progressively widespread in various sectors including agriculture. This study investigated the barriers to the diffusion of ICT in agricultural extension. Further, the study examined the effect of barriers toward ICT acceptance in agricultural extension. A paper and pencil survey by mail was conducted to collect data from 355 respondents in the Greater Surakarta Region, Indonesia. The study discovered that individual barriers, cultural barriers, government policy barriers, support and technological barriers significantly influenced the acceptance of ICT. In line with the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), these variables influenced perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and perceived intention to use of ICT. The findings suggested the methods that could be adopted by governments and non-government bodies to overcome the barriers in ICT implementation.
AkerJC (2011) Dial “A” for agriculture: A review of information and communication technologies for agricultural extension in developing countries. Agricultural Economics42(6): 631–647.
2.
AkpabioIAOkonDPInyangEB (2007) Constraints affecting ICT utilization by AEOin the Niger Delta, Nigeria. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension13(4): 263–272.
3.
ArendtL (2008) Barriers to ICT adoption in SMEs: How to bridge the digital divide?Journal of Systems and Information Technology10(2): 93–108
4.
BanduraA (1994) Self-efficacy. In RamachaudranVS (Ed.) Encyclopedia of Human Behavior, 4th ed. (pp 71–81). New York, NY: Academic Press.
BeekhuyzenJHellensLVSiedleM (2005) Cultural Barriers in the Adoption of Emerging Technologies. Proceedings of Human Computer Interaction International, July 22-27, 2005. Las Vegas, Nevada, USA.
BingimlasKA (2009) Barriers to the successful integration of ICT in teaching and learning environments: A review of the literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education5(3): 235–245.
9.
DavisFD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of IT. MIS Quarterly13(3): 319–340.
10.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18(1): 39–50.
11.
HairJFJrAndersonRETathamRLBlackWC (1998) Multivariate Data Analysis. 5th ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. USA.
KoehnenTL (2011) Book reviews: ICTs for agricultural extension. Global experiments, innovations and experiences. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension17(5): 473–477.
14.
KoswaraAUMariaA (2004) country report: e-Learning practice in indonesia. Proceedings of Information Integration and Web-based Application and Services, December 4-6, 2004. Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
15.
LeeYHHsiaoCPurnomoSH (2014) An empirical examination of individual and system characteristics on enhancing e-learning acceptance. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology30(5): 562–579.
16.
LinJCLuH (2000) Towards an understanding of the behavioral intention to use a website. International Journal of Information Management20(3): 197–208.
17.
MeeraSNJhamtaniARaoDUM (2004) Information and communication technology in agricultural development: A comparative analysis of three projects from India. Agricultural Research and Extension Network. Paper135 (p. 14).
18.
MunganiaP (2007) The Seven E-Learning Barriers Facing Employees. Research Final Report of the Masie Center of e-Learning consortium, University of Louisville, USA.
19.
NakasoneEToreroM (2016) A text message away: ICTs as a tool to improve food security. Agricultural Economics47(51): 49–59.
20.
OmotayoOM (2005)ICT and agricultural extension, emerging issues in transferring agricultural technology in developing countries. In: AdedoyinSF (ed.) Agricultural Extension in Nigeria. Ilorin: Agricultural Extension Society of Nigeria .
21.
OngCSLaiJY (2006) Gender differences in perceptions and relationships among dominants of e-learning acceptance. Computers in Human Behavior22(5): 816–829.
22.
ParkNRomanRLeeSChungJE (2009) User acceptance of a digital library system in developing countries: An application of the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Information Management29(3): 196–209.
23.
PurnomoSHLeeYH (2010) An assessment of readiness and barriers towards ICT program implementation: Perceptions of AEO in Indonesia. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology6(3): 19–36.
24.
PurnomoSHLeeYH (2012) E-learning adoption in the banking workplace in Indonesia: An empirical study. Information Development29(2) 138–153.
25.
RogersE (1983) Diffusion of Innovations. 3rd ed. The Free Press: A Division of Macmillan Publishing, Co., Inc, New York, USA
26.
SegarsAHGroverV (1998) Strategic information systems planning success: An investigation of the construct and its measurement. MIS Quarterly22(2): 139–163.
27.
Soekartawi. (2005) Constraints in implementing ‘E-learning’ using WebCT: Lessons from the SEAMEO Regional Open Learning Center. Malaysian Online Journal of Instructional Technology2(2): 97–105.
28.
UNESCO (2002) Information and Communication Technology in Education–A Curriculum for Schools and Programme for Teacher Development. Paris: UNESCO.
29.
VenkateshV (2000) Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research11(4): 342–365.
30.
VenkateshVDavisFD (1996) A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sciences27(3): 451–481.
31.
VenkateshVDavisFD (2000) A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science46(2): 186–204.
32.
VickersA (2005) A History of Modern Indonesia. Cambridge University Press.
33.
World Bank (2011) World Bank: Indonesia World’s 10th Largest Economy. Jakarta Globe4 May 2011.
