Augmented reality (AR) is a disruptive technology with enormous potential to accelerate digital transformation in developing economies. Although we have witnessed its rapid adoption in developed markets, AR adoption in developing countries is still at a nascent stage, constrained by infrastructural, socio-economic and cultural factors. The article uses the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (F-AHP), a robust multi-criteria decision-making model, to identify and prioritize key factors influencing the adoption of AR in developing countries. Based on the expert evaluation, 12 main criteria and 44 sub-criteria were evaluated, including technological, psychological, economic, social and regulatory criteria. Findings indicate that the user’s attitude and technological attributes are the most significant, and the most significant sub-criteria are system reliability and productivity enhancement. Perceived costs, informativeness and vividness also play significant roles in user intention to adopt AR, but technical and user-centric risks are the main obstacles. Moreover, privacy, security and legal and regulatory risks pose long-term challenges that require sustainable adoption, but they have lower short-term impacts. The study contributes to consumer behaviour theory (CBT), as this theory provides a powerful framework that considers both cognitive and behavioural factors affecting AR adoption in emerging economies. It offers practical advice to policymakers, technology designers and industry advocates on strategies to emphasize cost reduction, promote local content development, enhance infrastructure and build trust to support the adoption of AR technology.
AbudayyehO., FredericksT. K., ButtS. E., & ShaarA. (2006). An investigation of management’s commitment to construction safety. International Journal of Project Management, 24(2), 167–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.07.005
2.
AcquistiA., TaylorC., & WagmanL. (2016). The economics of privacy. Journal of Economic Literature, 54(2), 442–492. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.54.2.442
3.
AjzenI. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T?>https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
4.
AkinradewoO., HafezM., AliuJ., OkeA., AigbavboaC., & AdekunleS. (2025). Barriers to the adoption of augmented reality technologies for education and training in the built environment: A developing country context. Technologies, 13(2), 62. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies13020062
5.
AlamS. S., SusmitS., LinC. Y., MasukujjamanM., & HoY. H. (2021). Factors affecting augmented reality adoption in the retail industry. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7(2), 142.
6.
AlmaiahM. A., Al-KhasawnehA., & AlthunibatA. (2024). Factors influencing augmented reality adoption in higher education: An integrated technology acceptance perspective. In Education and information technologies. Springer.
7.
BaabdullahA. M., DwivediY. K., RanaN. P., & WilliamsM. D. (2021). Artificial intelligence (AI): Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 57, 101994.
8.
BambergerP. (2009). Employee help-seeking: Antecedents, consequences and new insights for future research. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 28, 49–98.
9.
BasoleR. C., ParkH., & ChaoR. O. (2020). Visual analysis of venture similarity in entrepreneurial ecosystems. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 67(3), 844–858. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2018.2876848
10.
BasoleR. C., ParkH., & BarnettB. C. (2020). Coopetition and convergence in the ICT ecosystem. Telecommunications Policy, 44(2), 101829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2019.101829
11.
BüyüközkanG., & GöçerF. (2018). Digital supply chain: A literature review and a proposed framework for future research. Computers in Industry, 97, 157–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2018.02.010
12.
BuckleyJ. J. (1985). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 17(3), 233–247.
13.
ChawkiN., RouchdiM., AllaM., & FaresB. (2024). Numerical modeling of a novel solar cell system consisting of electron transport material (ETM)/CaZrS3-based chalcogenide perovskites using SCAPS-1D software. Solar Energy, 274, 112592.
14.
DaftR. L., & LengelR. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554–571.
15.
DavisF. 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
16.
DavisG. B. (2000). The theory of technology acceptance. Management Science, 46(8), 1030–1045.
17.
DhirA., KaurP., ChenS., & PallesenS. (2018). Antecedents and consequences of social media fatigue. International Journal of Information Management, 48, 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.02.012
18.
DowlingG. R., & StaelinR. (1994). A model of perceived risk and intended risk-handling activity. Journal of Consumer Research, 21(1), 119–134.
19.
DwivediY. K., HughesL., IsmagilovaE., AartsG., CoombsC., CrickT., DuanY., DwivediR., EdwardsJ. S., EirugA., GalanosV., IlavarasanP. V., JanssenM., JonesP., KarA. K., KizginH., KronemannB., LalB., LuciniB., … WilliamsM. D. (2022). Metaverse beyond the hype: Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 66, 102542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102542
20.
DwivediY. K., KshetriN., HughesL., SladeE. L., JeyarajA., KarA. K., BaabdullahA. M., KoohangA., RaghavanV., AhujaM., AlbannaH., AlbashrawiM. A., AlalwanA. A., BalakrishnanJ., BarletteY., BasuS., CarterL., ChowdhuryS., CrickT., & WrightR. (2023). So what if ChatGPT wrote it? Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. International Journal of Information Management, 71, 102642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
21.
FaqihK. M. (2022). Factors influencing the behavioral intention to adopt a technological innovation from a developing country context: The case of mobile augmented reality games. Technology in Society, 69, 101958.
22.
FaqihK. M. (2024). Innovativeness and immersive system adoption. Computers & Education, 197, 104653.
23.
FeathermanM. S., & PavlouP. A. (2003). Predicting e-services adoption: A perceived risk facets perspective. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 59(4), 451–474.
24.
FriedmanB., KahnP. H., & BorningA. (2008). Value sensitive design and information systems. In The handbook of information and computer ethics. Wiley.
25.
Gartner, Inc. (2022). Hype cycle for emerging technologies, Gartner Research.
26.
GreenleafG. (2024). Global data privacy laws 2024: Regulatory divergence and emerging technologies. Privacy Laws & Business International Report, 182, 1–6.
27.
GSMA. (2021). The mobile economy 2021.
28.
HarborthD., & FrikA. (2018). Privacy considerations in mobile AR applications. USENIX Association, SOUPS Conference.
29.
HarborthD., & FrikA. (2021). Evaluating smartphone permissions and privacy justifications in mobile augmented reality apps. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS 2021) (pp. 513–534). USENIX Association. https://www.usenix.org/conference/soups2021/presentation/harborth
30.
HilkenT., de RuyterK., ChylinskiM., MahrD., & KeelingD. I. (2017). Making omnichannel an immersive experience. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 40, 1–16.
31.
International Data Corporation. (2023). Worldwide augmented and virtual reality spending guide.
32.
JavornikA. (2016). ‘It’s an illusion, but it looks real!’ Consumer responses to augmented reality applications. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 30, 252–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.02.006
33.
JiangZ., & BenbasatI. (2007). Investigating the influence of interactive product presentations on online consumer decision making. Information Systems Research, 18(4), 454–470.
34.
KahnemanD., SibonyO., & SunsteinC. R. (2021). Noise: A flaw in human judgment. Little, Brown Spark.
35.
KahramanC. (2018). Fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making methods and applications. Springer.
36.
KazmiS. H. A., AhmedR. R., SoomroK. A., HashemA. R., AkhtarH., & ParmarV. (2021). Role of augmented reality in changing consumer behavior and decision making: Case of Pakistan. Sustainability, 13(24), 14064. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132414064
37.
KohnV., & HarborthD. (2018). Augmented reality—A game changing technology for manufacturing processes?In Twenty-Sixth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2018).
38.
KowalczukP., SiepmannC., & AdlerJ. (2021). Cognitive, affective, and behavioral consumer responses to augmented reality in e-commerce: A comparative study. Journal of Business Research, 124, 357–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.050
39.
LeeH., JungT. H., Tom DieckM. C., & ChungN. (2020). Experiencing immersive virtual reality in museums. Information & Management, 57(5), 103229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2019.103229
40.
LiuY., LiH., & SanthanamR. (2021). Digital risk perception and system reliability in emerging technologies. Information Systems Research, 32(4), 1271–1290. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2021.1023
41.
LiuS., ZhaoX., MengX., JiW., LiuL., LiW., TaoY., PengY., & YangQ. (2024). Research on the application of extended reality in the construction and management of landscape engineering. Electronics, 13(5), 897. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics13050897
42.
LutzC., & Tamò-LarrieuxA. (2021). Do privacy concerns about social robots affect use intentions? Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 8, 627958. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2021.627958
43.
LutzC., & Tamò-LarrieuxA. (2022). Privacy risk in immersive AR adoption. Journal of Business Ethics, 180, 401–417.
44.
MarinovaD., de RuyterK., & HuangM.-H. (2024). Technology infusion in service encounters: Implications for customer experience and digital adoption. Sage Publications.
45.
McLeanG., & WilsonA. (2019). Shopping in the digital world: Examining customer engagement through augmented reality mobile applications. Computers in Human Behavior, 101, 210–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.002
46.
MichelettoV., AccardiS., FiciA., PiccoliF., RossiC., BilucagliaM., RussoV., & ZitoM. (2025). Enjoy it! Cosmetic try-on apps and augmented reality: The impact of enjoyment, informativeness, and ease of use. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 54, 102110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2025.102110
47.
MichelettoV., AccardiS., FiciA., PiccoliF., RossiC., BilucagliaM., RussoV., & ZitoM. (2024). Enjoy it! Cosmetic try-on apps and augmented reality: The impact of enjoyment, informativeness and ease of use. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 6, Article 1515937. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2025.1515937
48.
NgoT. T. A., TranT. T., AnG. A., & NguyenP. T. (2025). Investigating the influence of augmented reality marketing application on consumer purchase intentions: A study in the e-commerce sector. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 18(5), 100648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100648
49.
OkeA. E., & ArowoiyaV. A. (2022). Critical barriers to augmented reality technology adoption in developing countries: A case study of Nigeria. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology, 20(5), 1320–1333. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-12-2020-0519
50.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2022). OECD Digital Economy Outlook 2022.
51.
PantanoE., & ServidioR. (2012). Modeling innovative points of sales through virtual and immersive technologies. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 19(3), 279–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2012.02.002
52.
PorterM. E., & HeppelmannJ. E. (2017). Why every organization needs an augmented reality strategy. Harvard Business Review, 95(6), 46–62.
53.
PoushnehA., & Vasquez ParragaA. Z. (2017). Discernible impact of augmented reality on retail customer’s experience, satisfaction and willingness to buy. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 34, 229–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2016.10.005
54.
QianC., DeckerE. A., XiaoH., & McClementsD. J. (2012). Nanoemulsion delivery systems: Influence of carrier oil on β-carotene bioaccessibility. Food Chemistry, 135(3), 1440–1447.
55.
QianL., DeguetA., WangZ., LiuY.-H., & KazanzidesP. (2019). Augmented reality assisted instrument insertion and tool manipulation for the first assistant in robotic surgery. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (pp. 5173–5179). IEEE.
56.
RaduI. (2014). Augmented reality in education: A meta-review and cross-media analysis. Computers & Education, 70, 153–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.017
57.
RadiantiJ., MajchrzakT. A., FrommJ., & WohlgenanntI. (2020). A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda. Computers & Education, 147, 103778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103778
58.
RauschnabelP. A., RossmannA., & Tom DieckM. C. (2018). An adoption framework for mobile augmented reality games: The case of Pokémon Go. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 276–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.07.030
59.
RauschnabelP. A., FelixR., & HinschC. (2019). Augmented reality marketing: How mobile AR apps can improve brands through inspiration. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 49, 43–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.03.004
60.
RauschnabelP. A., FelixR., HinschC., ShahabH., & AltF. (2022). What is XR? Towards a framework for augmented and virtual reality. Computers in Human Behavior, 133, 107289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107289
61.
SaatyT. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill.
62.
SaatyT. L. (1990). How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research, 48(1), 9–26.
63.
SahinE., & YilmazV. (2023). Acceptance of augmented reality technology in retailing: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 71, 103207.
64.
ScheinK. E., RauschnabelP. A., Praxmarer-CarusS., & BabinB. J. (2025). Unpacking augmentation quality and local presence: Factors that drive effective augmented reality marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-025-01108-2
ShenY., LiY., & ZhouR. (2023). Privacy concerns, trust, and user adoption of augmented reality mobile applications. Information Systems Frontiers, 25, 877–891. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-022-10345-7
67.
ShiJ., JainR., ChiS., DohH., ChiH., QuinnA. J., & RamaniK. (2025). CARING AI: Towards authoring context aware augmented reality instruction through generative artificial intelligence. In Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’25). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713348
68.
SoodK., RajS., & GuptaS. (2025). Metaverse E-commerce: Path from hype to reality. Thunderbird International Business Review.
69.
SoodK., PathakP., JainJ., & GuptaS. (2022). How does an investor prioritize ESG factors in India? An assessment based on fuzzy AHP. Managerial Finance, 49(1), 66–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-04-2022-0162
SundarS. S., KangJ., & OpreanD. (2015). Being there in the midst of the story: How immersive media influence user engagement. Media Psychology, 18(2), 199–218.
72.
UNCTAD. (2021). Digital economy report 2021: Cross-border data flows and development. United Nations.
73.
UNCTAD. (2024). Digital Economy Report 2024. United Nations. Retrieved fromhttps://unctad.org/publication/digital-economy-report-2024
74.
United Nations. (2021). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development.
75.
UNESCO. (2022). Technology in education: A tool on whose terms?
76.
Van DijkJ. (2020). Digital inequality: Theory and evidence from developing countries. Information Society, 36(5), 317–332.
77.
VenkateshV., & DavisF. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model. Management Science, 46(2), 186–204.
78.
VenkateshV., MorrisM. G., DavisG. B., & DavisF. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
79.
VenkateshV., ThongJ. Y. L., & XuX. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412
80.
YimM. Y.-C., & SauerP. L. (2024). The impact of augmented reality on consumer responses in digital retail environments. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 74, 103454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2023.103454
81.
YimM. Y.-C., ChuS.-C., & SauerP. L. (2017). Experiential vividness and consumer engagement in immersive commerce. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 39, 89–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2017.04.001
82.
YimW. W., AbachaA. B., FuY., SunZ., XiaF., Yetisgen-YildizM., & KrallingerM. (2024, June). Overview of the MEDIQA-M3G 2024 shared task on multilingual multimodal medical answer generation. In Proceedings of the 6th Clinical Natural Language Processing Workshop (pp. 581–589).
83.
YoonS., & OhJ. (2022). A theory-based approach to the usability of augmented reality technology: A cost-benefit perspective. Technology in Society, 68, 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.101860
84.
ZhouF., DuhH. B.-L., & BillinghurstM. (2008). Trends in augmented reality tracking, interaction and display: A review of ten years of ISMAR. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 14(6), 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2008.163
