Perceptual Factors Influencing the Adoption of Innovative Tissue Culture Technology by the Australian Avocado Industry

Abstract

Avocado growers in Australia are currently experiencing long wait times for orchard-ready plants, limiting productivity and profitability. Tissue culture technology represents a faster and more efficient process of producing plants, offering a solution. However, the development of new growing technology comes with the inherent risk of industry nonacceptance and limited uptake, a costly problem for both innovators and industry. This study explored factors related to technology acceptance by the intended end-users of tissue culture technology within the avocado industry in Australia. The study provides key insights into the overall industry sentiment towards uptake and adoption of tissue-culture technology. An online survey was conducted with participants from the Australian avocado industry and demonstrated perceptions of tissue culture technology were generally positive and that, with appropriate extension services, adoption is predicted to be high across industry users. This paper contributes to the behavioural science of technology adoption by exploring perceived use and likely uptake prior to the broad extension strategies of a new technology.

1. Introduction

Australian avocados (Persea americana (fam. Lauraceae)) are in demand both domestically and internationally, with demand often higher than supply. Domestically, avocado imports from New Zealand supplement supply during the Australian spring and summer, with 24,688 tonnes of fruit imported in 2020 [1]. Approval has recently been granted for avocados from Chile to be imported into Australia to bolster supply [2]. There is also demand for Australian avocado exports in markets such as Singapore and Malaysia [2], Thailand, South Asia, Hong Kong, UAE, Kuwait, Indonesia, and Japan, but only 4% of Australian production was exported in the last year [1]. The inability for the domestic production of avocados to meet domestic and international demand represents a missed opportunity for the Australian avocado industry.

According to industry reports, the main issue preventing market demand for avocados being met by Australian producers is the bottleneck in the supply of market-ready plants to existing and planned orchards [3,4]. Commercial avocado trees are not planted directly from seed due to high genetic heterogeneity. Instead, plants are propagated, i.e., a rootstock and a fruiting scion are grown and then grafted together to produce a tree with desirable field characteristics [5]. Current propagation techniques are effective but time-consuming and seasonal, leading to growers experiencing long wait times for plants [1,6]. Tissue culture technology represents a more efficient way of producing avocado plants than the current propagation methods and, thus, a way to increase production and capitalize on consumer demand [7]. The tissue culture-based growing system is 33–50% faster than the other methods in the market in producing orchard-ready avocado plants [6]. The system also requires less resource input, has a higher throughput, and uses elite breeder selections to ensure high quality and uniform trees [6]. However, the development of new growing technology comes with the inherent risk of industry nonacceptance and limited uptake, a costly problem for both innovators and industry. Tissue culture technology has been used successfully in other plants, e.g., ornamental trees, bananas [8] but, to date, has not been viably applied to avocado production.

Technology Adoption

The development and adoption of new technologies has been one of the most important factors shaping agricultural production systems [9]. However, the adoption of agricultural technologies is inconsistent and not well-understood [10], despite technology being lauded as the future of agriculture [11]. Research aiming to identify reasons behind nonacceptance of technology tends to focus on stable and tangible factors such as socio-demographic factors, e.g., farmer age, education, and agro-ecological factors [12,13,14], as well as individual personality factors such as risk- and ambiguity-aversion [15,16]. Yet, there are a range of psychological factors based on technology acceptance frameworks that are likely to have a significant influence on the likelihood of technology adoption that have not been explored extensively in the agricultural literature.

The Technology Acceptance Model 2 (TAM 2) [17] is one such technology acceptance framework that proposes psychological factors as key influencers in accepting innovation. The TAM 2 posits that a key mediator of the intention to use technology is one’s perception of the innovation as useful (see Figure 1). In this way, whether a grower perceives the technology as solving a particular problem, such as long wait times for plants, would speak to this perception of tissue culture technology being useful. In addition, Venkatesh and Davis [17] argue that the image one has of the technology (informed by appropriate and effective dissemination and communication); the relevance to one’s job; one’s perception of whether the technology will improve the quality of their output (e.g., producing trees that have higher quality root systems, faster cropping speed); and whether the result will be similar to what is stated by the technology developers are integral to adoption. The TAM 2 provides a context in which to explore the complexities involved in prompting avocado industry members to adopt tissue culture technology. The use of these models in informing technology adoption is supported by the growing body of literature highlighting the need for more dynamic, flexible and ‘complexity-aware’ approaches to agriculture innovation [18]. To date, the Australian avocado industry has not been exposed to technology acceptance frameworks, nor broad psychological principles, to inform the dissemination and uptake of advanced technology. The current study seeks to provide a descriptive, industry-informed approach to fill this gap in the research.

Issues in measuring technology adoption in agriculture may arise when research on perceptions and intentions are conducted after the fact, and not prior to the release of a technology (e.g., [19,20]). The current study afforded the opportunity to understand the perception of tissue culture technology prior to release. This enabled a stronger sentiment and understanding of the technology to be explored prior to any impact assessment and adoption measures post launch. This project aimed to address the lack of research on attitudes towards technology adoption more broadly in the Australian avocado industry. Using a behavioural lens, situated within the TAM 2 model, this study aimed to comprehensively examine how members of the Australian avocado industry view industry operations and the potential advantages of, and barriers to, tissue culture adoption prior to its commercial release. Results from an online survey, informed through participatory research, demonstrated positive sentiment regarding tissue culture technology through endorsement of the key psychological factors in the TAM2. The results of this study will be of interest to tissue culture scientists, tree suppliers, and government agencies aiming to grow Australian avocado exports. These data can also be used to inform extension activities and the broader acceptance of psychological tools in agriculture in Australia.

2. Materials and Methods

The study was approved by Central Queensland University Human Research Ethics Committee (Project Number H21343) and was carried out in 2019.

2.1. Design

A multi-step mixed-method process was used to design an online quantitative survey. Existing literature on technology adoption informed a broad set of questions to measure industry views on the adoption of tissue culture technology. The questions underwent review and feedback with Australian avocado industry stakeholders via telephone interviews. Questions focused on industry-specific issues, such as tree supply, and perceptions of tissue culture technology. Common themes from the telephone interviews were identified and then used to develop the pilot survey. The pilot survey was disseminated to key growers and industry members, and feedback was used to refine the final survey instrument and ensure consistency with terminology used in the avocado industry.

The final survey consisted of 24 category items and 44 sub-items. Ten items asked about participant demographics, with the remaining items tapping into respondent perceptions. Likert scale items were rated on a 5-point scale with different anchor points for different item categories, including ‘extremely limited’ and ‘more than enough’ (current industry access to avocado trees); ‘strongly disagree’ and ‘strongly agree’ (perceptions of the acceptance of tissue culture and ease of use to learn about and use tissue culture trees [21,22]); ‘very little’ and ‘a lot’ (perceptions of resources needed to use tissue culture); and ‘very difficult’ and ‘very easy’ (perception of learning about tissue culture trees [22,23]). The features of tissue culture trees and supply chain factors perceived to be most influential on tissue culture adoption were ranked according to ‘most influential,’ ‘second most influential,’ and ‘third most influential’ [24].

2.2. Recruitment and Sampling

Respondents for the survey were recruited via articles in avocado industry publications, advertising posters distributed at industry events, and emails to industry members provided by key industry representatives. Inclusion criteria included being over the age of 18 and working in the Australian avocado industry. Participation was anonymous and voluntary, and participants received no compensation for taking part. Informed consent was considered obtained following commencement of the survey after reading the information sheet.

2.3. Participants

Forty-one adults who were part of the Australian avocado industry volunteered to complete the online survey. Data cleaning resulted in five participants being excluded from analyses due to more than 80% missing data, leaving 36 participants: 27 males and 7 females, as well as 2 participants who chose to not identify their gender. The proportion of participants from each Australian state is broadly representative of the scale of the avocado industry in each state [1]. Key participant characteristics are reported in

Table 1. Participant characteristics (n = 41).

Demographic Variable
Mean age (y)	50.6
Age range (y)	22–80
State of employment:
Queensland	24 (66.6%)
New South Wales	4 (11.4%)
Western Australia	4 (11.4%)
South Australia	1 (2.9%)
Current work type:
Full-time	17 (47.2%)
Self-employed	13 (36.1%)
Part-time	3 (8.6%)
Casual	1 (2.8%)
Retired	1 (2.8%)
Role in avocado industry:
Grower/farmer	15 (41.7%)
Researcher/breeder	7 (19.4%)
Agronomist	4 (11.1%)
Consultant	4 (11.1%)
Nursery/supplier	3 (8.3%)
Owner	1 (2.8%)
Currently work type:
On-farm	26 (72.2%)
Off-farm	10 (27.8%)
Years of on-farm experience:
<5	5 (16.7%)
6–10	5 (16.7%)
11–15	4 (13.3%)
16–20	4 (13.3%)
>20	12 (40%)
Years of industry experience:
<5	13 (36.1%)
6–10	7 (19.4%)
11–15	6 (16%)
16–20	2 (5.6%)
>20	8 (22.2%)

.

2.4. Analysis

All analyses were conducted in the IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 26 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) statistical program. All statistics reported are descriptive statistics, means and standard deviations, percentages and frequencies used to represent the data.

3. Results

Results are discussed below by TAM2 factor.

3.1. Current Industry Sentiment and Job Relevance of Tissue Culture

As seen in Figure 2, most domestic avocado industry members indicated that access to avocado plants was an issue, with 72% of the sample reporting limited or extremely limited access. Tree quality was the next most unfavourable point in access, with 56% reporting limited or extremely limited access to high quality trees (see Figure 3). Over half of the sample (53%) also rated access to the cultivars they wanted as being limited or extremely limited. Participants were split over whether the cost of tree cultivars was a challenge for the industry, with 56% of participants saying that it was a challenge, and 44% saying that it was not a challenge.

3.2. Output Quality and Result Demonstrability

The sample rated the top three features of tissue culture trees’ output quality that would be most influential on them adopting the technology. The features that were rated highest were quality of the root system, disease tolerance and tree uniformity. Items that were not rated highly included quality of the fruit produced, quantity of the fruit produced, cropping speed, drought hardiness, and salinity tolerance. Secondly, participants rated the top five external features, including result demonstrability, that would be most influential in tissue culture trees adoption. Recommendations from others and opportunities to observe field trials were the most highly rated external features.

Table 2. Top five most influential external features in tissue culture adoption.

External Feature	Mean Ranking
Recommendations	2.58
Opportunities to observe field trials	2.368
Quality of extension/after purchase support	3.04
Education/experience of growers	3.26
Availability of standardized management practices per cultivar	3.40
Potential for environmental savings	3.58

presents these results.

3.3. Perceived Usefulness of Tissue Culture

Perceptions of industry acceptance of tissue culture technology were positive, with 73% of participants agreeing or strongly agreeing that the avocado industry, as a whole, would be willing and interested in using tissue culture trees. A similar percentage (80%) agreed or strongly agreed that the industry would support the adoption of the technology. Two-thirds (67%) of the sample agreed or strongly agreed that tissue culture produced trees would be beneficial for the industry. When examining the sample’s perception of consumer sentiment, over three-quarters (77%) of respondents believed that consumers would purchase tissue culture avocados.

3.4. Perceived Ease of Use of Tissue Culture

Participants were asked to rate how much of six types of resources they perceived tissue culture plants requiring, with 1 being ‘very little’ and 5 being ‘a lot.’ These resources included patience, mental energy, effort, time, money, and staffing resources and represented barriers in the adoption of tissue culture technology. Ratings of all resources tended to cluster around the middle (M = 2.8–3 out of 5), except for money, which was positively skewed (M = 3.4), and staffing resources, which was negatively skewed (M = 2.6). This indicates that money, i.e., the anticipated cost of tissue culture plants and resources needed for growing, was viewed as a barrier for uptake. Participants were also asked to rate the top five supply factors that would be most influential in the ease of use of tissue culture trees (and subsequent adoption), with the most endorsed factors being access to desirable rootstock/scion combinations, competitive pricing, and reliable access to enough trees. This indicates that if tissue culture plants do not fit these needs, adoption will be unlikely. Lesser rated supply factors included opportunities for tissue cultured trees to increase fruit supply in domestic market and to expand fruit supply to export market.

3.5. Perception of Tissue Culture Knowledge and Skills Required, Subjective Norms, and Intention to Use

Almost all participants (87%) were aware of the existence of tissue culture technology for avocado trees. Two-thirds (67%) of participants indicated that they had reasonable knowledge of the technology, but as shown in Figure 4, less than half (40%) of industry members believed that they already had the skills and knowledge needed to use tissue culture trees, with 44% being undecided. In terms of extension, 83% of industry members believed that they could develop the knowledge and skills needed to use tissue culture trees if they were given the right information (see Figure 5). Most of the sample (93%) indicated that they enjoyed learning about new work-related technology. When asked if they thought that the industry would find learning about the technology difficult, only 8% indicated that this would be the case. Lastly, two-thirds of the sample (67%) agreed or strongly agreed that they planned to investigate using tissue culture trees and that they were likely to use tissue culture trees in the future.

4. Discussion

The current study explored the perceptions of supply of orchard-ready avocado trees in the Australian domestic market and the use of tissue culture technology to address supply chain demands. These data confirmed that the current supply of orchard-ready plants was highly problematic to the industry. The perception of tissue culture technology was mainly positive, with industry members believing that the technology would be useful and relatively easy to use, given suitable extension services. Barriers to adoption included concerns about the cost of the new technology.

4.1. Age, Experience, and Location

The study demographics demonstrated good buy-in by a range of industry members. Growers/farmers composed nearly half of the sample, which may indicate a high interest in the subject matter from this group. Most participants were based in Queensland, the largest producer of avocados in Australia [25], giving the study ecological validity. These demographic factors are important in designing extension services, as communication needs to be accessible across age groups, with an emphasis on the Queensland experience. Younger producers are more likely to be early adopters of technology in agriculture [26,27], with D’Souza and colleagues [26] arguing that designing extension programs that target this younger age group is likely to result in more uptake of technology than more general programs. In this way, as the largest producing state, it is important for extension programs to target industry members based in Queensland for tissue culture technology to be widely adopted.

4.2. Perception and Acceptance of Tissue Culture Technology

The key job relevant challenges identified by industry participants included limited access to the quantity, quality, and type of avocado trees that they want and the cost of avocado trees. In line with these current challenges that make tissue culture job relevant to avocado industry member in Australia, sentiment toward tissue culture technology was generally positive. Most industry members had heard of tissue culture technology and believed they could work with the technology if the right extension services were provided, providing evidence for positive sentiment around ease of use. This aligns with the data showing high domestic and international demand for Australian avocados but an inability of the domestic industry to keep up with that demand using traditional propagation methods [1]. This finding is important because previous research shows that perceiving agricultural technology as highly complex is a barrier to adoption, whereas perceiving the new technology as more useful than the current growing methods and as easy to use [28], as well as having the knowledge to use the technology, are key predictors of adoption and behavioral change [29]. These findings support the approach taken by models that use dynamic psychological factors to predict technology uptake, such as the TAM 2 [17], rather than more static structural factors. The core mechanisms of the TAM 2 are that experiences and subjective assessments of the new technology by producers, as well as the perceived ease, feed into the perceived usefulness, intention to use, and usage behavior [17]. This highlights how these perceptions of the technology, rather than simple characteristics of farmers or industry members, are useful contributing factors in the adoption and acceptance of technology.

Industry members overwhelmingly rated the competitive pricing of tissue culture trees, reliable access to enough tissue culture trees, and access to desirable rootstock/scion combinations as the most influential in making tissue culture easier to use and subsequent adoption. This echoes the earlier findings in job relevance that the supply of orchard-ready plants is a major challenge of industry members, and that the cost of plants was an issue for a large group of industry member. Previous research supports these findings, with technological innovations increasing supply [30] and financial constraints found to be a significant barrier for agricultural technology adoption [29].

Respondents were generally very positive about tissue culture, with most industry members saying that they plan to investigate it, that they enjoy learning about new technology and that they were likely to use tissue culture trees in the future. This demonstrates high perceived usefulness. According to the TAM 2 [17], perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness (i.e., output quality and the ability of the technology to increase supply) are key determinants in adoption, so this is an important element to measure and utilize in extension (as shown in Figure 1). Positive sentiment or perceived usefulness predicts the intention to use the technology which, in turn, predicts usage behaviour [17]. In supporting our use of the TAM 2 as a framework through which to view potential barriers and facilitators to agricultural technology adoption, previous research demonstrates that barriers to adoption include negative perceptions of usefulness and a lack of knowledge about the technology [29,31]. Conversely, early adopters of new technology in agriculture report that they had good access to information about the technology and believe they could learn how to use it [30]. Further, our participants felt that recommendations from professionals and the ability to see field trials would help in technology uptake. This aligns again with the Technology Acceptance Model 2 that posits that result demonstrability informs perceived usefulness and subsequent intention to use and usage behaviour.

Findings showed that most of the sample believed that the industry would be supportive of tissue culture and that consumers would purchase tissue culture produced fruit. The TAM 2 [17] states that subjective norms—the perceived attitudes and values of relevant peer groups—influence technology use. Therefore, that respondents view the industry as being supportive of and positive towards tissue culture technology is important and increases the overall likelihood of technology acceptance. This positivity should be capitalized on by extension services to support the industry and, thus, the likelihood of usage.

Money was viewed as the resource most needed to use tissue culture. This echoes earlier findings that the cost of trees is already a barrier for industry members. Australian famers, in general, operate in a volatile system as severe weather events such as droughts, fires and floods are common and negatively impact on production [32]. In addition, farmers traditionally have taken on high levels of debt with which to finance growth [33,34]. Thus, this finding that cost of inputs is a highly sensitive factor is not surprising, but it does highlight potential misconceptions about tissue culture technology that extension services must address. The economic modelling of tissue culture orchard growth has demonstrated that tissue culture planted orchards outperform traditionally grafted orchards with respect to decreased maximum negative cash exposure, decreased payback period, and increased cash flow annuity [6]. Thus, findings such as this highlight sensitive areas, presenting opportunities to ‘myth bust’ when disseminating information to those that are targets for technology uptake.

4.3. Strengths and Limitations

As participants are self-selected, it may be an unrepresentative sample, with a bias towards adoption, i.e., it is possible that individuals willing to complete a survey about tissue culture technology may already be interested in adoption. Another sampling limitation is the small size of the sample. However, the methodology and sampling were in line with broad participatory methods [35], and the sample size is reflective of an industry case approach as a basis for understanding technology acceptance. Further, in line with this methodology, other studies have considered sample sizes with 40 to 60 participants [36,37]. Moreover, the sample itself was diverse in terms of age, role, and experience in the industry, which increases the application and interpretation of the results.

5. Conclusions

The current study explored the Australian domestic avocado industry’s perceptions of and attitudes towards tissue culture trees and technology using a survey informed by industry stakeholders and experts. Investigating attitudes and perceptions of new technology is important as a precursor to behavior change and acceptance of new technology [17]. Importantly, the willingness and desire to learn, grow, and acquire knowledge and skills were factors that highlighted a readiness in the domestic industry to engage and understand the technology, reflecting the perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness factors in the TAM 2. The current study also demonstrates empirically that the supply and quality of trees, and the cost of trees, is problematic for the domestic market. This had not been demonstrated prior to the current study, despite anecdotal evidence within the industry. The readiness and preference of domestic industry members to prefer ‘hands on’ information dissemination about tissue culture demonstrates the usefulness of this kind of research in guiding extension and industry engagement methods in the wider agricultural sector. Future research should include targeted follow-up and industry-wide evaluation of adoption rates of tissue culture technology in order to refine the use of the TAM2 model in this context. In addition, there has been some economic modelling within the industry examining how earlier uptake of tissue culture tress may impact economic return [6]. Further multidisciplinary research that includes aspects such as economic impacts of adoption would promote greater clarity and understanding of technology acceptance.