Determinants to the Adoption & Diffusion of Agricultural Technological Innovation 

Abstract

The demand for sustainable food is increasing due to a growing world population, and changing dietary patterns. Food security is of particular concern in mountain environments, where biophysical constraints, and environmental and socioeconomic changes are undermining agriculture.  

Whilst the issues of food security, agricultural technological innovation (ATI) and adoption-diffusion processes have received attention worldwide, their particularities in mountain environments have been poorly investigated. This study explores key determinants and their interdependencies affecting ATI adoption-diffusion, and their subsequent impacts on food systems using a case study from Ladakh, India.

We employed an embedded multiple case study framework and several sources of evidence deriving from semi-structured interviews, focus groups, direct and indirect observations and photographic documentation. Interviewees included representatives from the farming community, innovation network, and institutional environment. 

The Ladakh case study illustrates how changing political, environmental and socioeconomic conditions have affected food security strategies of mountain households and farms. Whilst subsistence agriculture still forms the economic mainstay of the region, recent dynamics are characterised by livelihood diversification and urbanisation with increasing off-farm income opportunities.  Food security in Ladakh is broadly shaped by local choices and external interventions with actors operating at various decision-making levels. Markets are dictated by the interaction of traders, shopkeepers and to a minor extent companies, influencing decisions at the village level.

The study identified a complex web of economic, human capital, institutional, regulatory, behavioural, psychological, market, technological, social, cultural, and environmental determinants to the adoption-diffusion of ATIs. These include: rural-to-urban migration, shortage of agricultural labour, social capital decline, irrational beliefs, poor public access to capital, value chain inefficiencies, strong cultural propensity towards sustainability and adaptation to environmental change, positive feedback mechanisms between biophysical constraints and farming innovation, and  alternative educational schemes supportive of ATIs.

Introduction

The need to feed the growing world population and make the agricultural production system more efficient is of utmost importance. Despite rapid socioeconomic and technological changes, agriculture remains the world’s largest economic sector, having a workforce larger than all other sectors combined (Howden et al., 2007).

This has been particularly true for the remote, high altitude Indian region of Ladakh, where combined mountain agriculture has been the mainstay of the economy for thousands of years, providing employment and livelihood for the majority of its rural population (Goodall, 2004). However, remote mountain regions such as Ladakh often harbour extreme poverty and food insecurity due in part to geographic isolation, harsh topography, limited livelihood options and workforce outmigration to urban areas (Mountain Institute, 2016).

Situated under the Karakoram Mountains, in the rain shadow area north of the Himalayan watershed, Ladakh is a cold desert environment with limited natural resource potential such as poor water availability and soil quality. Despite the extreme climate and harsh environment, the people of Ladakh have lived a self-reliant and frugal existence, practising subsistence agriculture and incorporating social harmony, environmental sustainability, and spiritual sophistication in their day-to-day life (Norberg-Hodge, 2000). However, recent and abrupt socioeconomic, political and environmental changes such as urbanization, government anti-poverty programmes, agricultural specialization and livelihood diversification, broadly induced by the combined actions of industrialization, globalization, and climate change, have led to hidden hunger, water insecurity, cultural and social degradation and pollution.

Previous studies on the adoption-diffusion of innovations indicated that these require strong local support from socially important members of the community (Henrich, 2001), local adaptability to economic and social needs (Rogers, 2003), and institutional support to guide the learning process (Stone, 2016). Furthermore, many studies have failed to adequately comment on the dynamic learning, self-organizing and risky and uncertain characteristics of adoption-diffusion processes. Other research on the diffusion of agricultural innovations in resource-poor communities, further indicated that such development can cripple innovations that do not take into consideration the social differences within a community (Tripp, 2006) or when villagers decide that the technology and its institutional environment are inadequate to the needs and resources of local producers and consumers (Flachs, 2016). Furthermore, studies in mountain environments are lacking in diffusion studies, which often concentrate on the interactions with agribusiness among lowland groups  (Conley and Udry, 2010; Henrich and McElreath, 2002).

The concerns over food security and the slow rates of technological adoption in mountain environments, are fuelled by the need to: i) increase food production and local food supply; ii) improve technological generation efficiency; iii) assess the effectiveness of technology transfer; and iv) demonstrate the impact of investing in technology generation.  These in turn form the basis and importance of conducting this study. 

This research is an attempt to identify the range of factors influencing the adoption-diffusion of modern ATIs in multiple food crops in the Himalayan region of Ladakh, India. Central to this aim is to develop meaning and test theories in respect to the socioeconomic and environmental sustainability of ATIs development in the Himalaya such as: hydroponic farming, geothermal greenhouses, genetically modified crops (GMC) and other locally relevant water conservation and irrigation solutions such as artificial glaciers.

Central to this analysis is a case study exploration of participants’ views, knowledge and experience of the situations being studied (Creswell, 2003). This comprises answering questions of community and individual acceptance, beliefs, attitudes, values, motives, perceptions, behaviours, experiences, cultural rigidity and flexibility, institutional processes and social challenges and opportunities, new potentials and dependencies, and willingness to participate in and support the development of farming innovation (Rehman et al., 2007; Garforth et al., 2006; Botha and Atkins, 2005).

Methodology

The study employed a qualitative research methodology comprising constructivist knowledge claims, an ethnographic strategy of inquiry with an exploratory purpose and two units of analysis focused on barriers and enablers to the adoption-diffusion of ATIs in Ladakh. We used several sources of evidence gathered using rapid rural appraisal techniques (Beebe, 1995) within an embedded multiple case study framework. These were: semi-structured interviewing, focus groups, direct and indirect observation and photographic documentation. In addition, we carried out a literature review to extrapolate key information on areas within the current mountain agricultural system, the technological innovation and adoption scene and the micro, meso and macro environmental and socioeconomic trends that affect them. This step was essential to understand the breadth of present and historical information on food production and consumption systems; food security challenges and trends; relevant policies; technological innovation networks; and internal and external forces affecting these. The literature review helped to shape the research design by determining the focus of the study and a suitable methodology for conducting it. 

Bounding the Study

The study was conducted in the Ladakh region of Jammu and Kashmir, India in June/July 2016. Key informants comprised representatives from the innovation network, farming community and institutional environment actors. The study focused on experiences and events and the perceptions and meanings attached to these as expressed by the informants (Yin, 2009). This included the assimilation of surprising events or information, and making sense of critical events and issues that arose (Creswell, 2003). Ethically, the researcher sought to respect the rights, needs, values, and desires of informants. However, ethnographic research is almost always obtrusive as the participant’s observation invades the life of the informant (Spradley, 1980) and sensitive information is frequently revealed. The following safeguards were employed to protect the informants’ rights (Creswell, 2003):

a)     Research objectives (and a description of how the data will be used) were articulated verbally and in writing so that they were clearly understood by the informant;

b)     Written permission to proceed with the study as articulated was received from the informant;

c)     Interviewees were informed in respect to data collection devices and activities;

d)     The informants’ rights, interests and wishes were considered when choices were made regarding the reporting of data;

e)     The final decision regarding the informants’ anonymity rested with the individual informant.

The explorative case study was preceded by statements about what was to be explored, the purpose of the exploration, and the criteria by which the exploration was assessed. The mode of generalization employed was analytic, in which a previously developed theory or set of theories are used as templates with which the empirical results of the case study were partly compared. Various notions of illustrative social theory were considered prior, during and after the fieldwork (Yin, 2009). A multiple, embedded case study design (Figure 4), which followed the replication logic (i.e. case studies were considered as multiple experiments with priority given to facilitate replication of findings) was employed comprising five case studies of ATIs or related as follows:

·       Case I: the innovative water conservation and irrigation system comprising artificial glaciers managed by the Leh Nutrition Project (LNP);

·       Case II: the organic horticulture and improved solar greenhouse initiatives managed by the Ladakh Ecological Development Group (LEDeG), Ladakh Renewable Energy Development Agency (LREDA), Ladakh Environmental and Health Organization (LEHO); and Women’s Alliance of Ladakh (WAL);

·       Case III: the food subsidy programme (Public Distribution System in Ladakh) managed by the Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council (LAHDC), under the jurisdiction of the Regional Government of Jammu and Kashmir; 

·       Case IV: the alternative education systems pioneered and managed by the Students' Educational and Cultural Movement of Ladakh (SECMOL) and Puga Nomadic School;

·       Case V: a hypothetical future geothermal greenhouse equipped with hydroponic systems entitled the Arahant Project and developed by the principal author (Jiduc, 2016) (used as a comparator case study).

Data Collection and Analysis

Four existing, illustrative cases were selected dealing with the creation of a range of more sustainable forms of agriculture, in the social, ecological and economic sense, through both technological and non-technological innovation, along with one hypothetical future ATI for broad comparison (Table 1). 

The data collection approaches employed in this study followed two particular protocols: i) observational, which comprised description and reflective notes along with demographic information such as time, place, and date of the observations and ii) an interview protocol for recording information with the following components: a heading; opening statements; the key research questions; probes to follow key questions; translation messages for the interviewer; space for recording the interviewer’s comments and reflective notes (Creswell, 2003). A summary of data collection approaches and sources of evidence is provided below:

·       Observational notes were recorded;

·       Semi-structured interviews were conducted using a combination of audiotaping and note-taking techniques;

·       Public documents (e.g. official memos, records, archival material) were analysed;

·       Photo documentation;

·       Possession of ritual objects was noted;

·       Newspaper articles were scanned optically;

·       Physical structures (e.g. greenhouses) were examined and documented photographically and textually.

Data collection activities took place during June and July 2016. This included: i) open-ended, face to face interviews (n=22) with actors from the farming community, innovation network and institutional environment, who acted both as respondents telling about their own experiences and as informants giving the broader picture and observations; and ii) similar focus groups (n=3). In addition, the investigator carried out photographic documentation (e.g. repeat photography, and photojournalism), direct and indirect observation as well as an analysis of a range of internal network documents and external documents (e.g. policy documents and newspaper articles). Furthermore, a field notebook was kept recording: i) the informants’ impressions, thoughts and feelings; ii) a detailed account of the way time was spent in the field and in the transcription and analysis phase; iii) details related to the researcher’s observations together with a chronicle of his own thinking, feeling, experiences and perceptions throughout the research process. 

Data collection and analysis were carried out as a continuous process (Marshal and Rossman, 1989). Analysis was primarily carried out by classifying things, persons, and events and the properties, which characterise them by using as many categories as possible (Jacob, 1987). Patterns and themes were identified and described from the perspective of the participant. The data were organised categorically and chronologically, reviewed repeatedly and continually coded. Recorded interviews and the participant’s diary were summarised in text. Field notes and diazentries were regularly reviewed. The interviews were partially transcribed and analysed with qualitative data analysis software (Atlas 6.0) to collate, segment, code and visualise the data and facilitate sound analyses and interpretation. The analysis was complemented with the examination of a range of internal and external network documents (e.g. policy documents, newspaper and magazine articles), videos and photographs. Moreover, the multi-stranded approach enabled triangulation, thus preventing the risk of distortions in post-factual accounts, increasing internal validity (Klerkx et al., 2010). Final inferences were made following a two level rational framework. 

Coding

Coding is key step in data analysis and is defined as an attempt to organise data into ‘chunks’ before bringing meaning to these (Rossman and Rallis, 1998). Codes are labels for marking units of meaning to data, usually words, phrases, sentences, or paragraphs within the interview summaries (Basit, 2003). Analysing interview data in this manner helped to understand the meanings, relationships and assumptions behind respondents’ understandings of the world, as well as the phenomena in question (ibid). The coding process generated a detailed rendering of information about people, places, or events in a particular setting. Informants were coded as shown (Table 2), with these codes being used for referencing of informants in the text below.

Table 2. Description of the coding process employed in this study.

Ladakh Case Study Region

Geographical Characteristics

Ladakh is a semiautonomous, high altitude, cold desert region situated in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir (Figure 5). It spans from 33° to 35° latitude North and 76° to 79° longitude East, and shares India’s northern boundary with Pakistan and China. Ladakh is crossed by a system of mountain ranges running roughly parallel to each other in the direction northwest to southeast. These are from north to south: The Karakoram, Ladakh, Zanskar and Himalaya and subsequently determine the course of Ladakh’s rivers (Thayyen et al., 2012). The region is drained by the Indus River which runs for approximately 450km and receives a series of glacier fed tributaries such as: Shyok, Shigar, Gilgit, and Zanskar. 

The region is characterized by a rugged topography and an average elevation of over 3000m: the western and central parts are dominated by incised valleys and mountain ranges of altitudes above 6000m, whereas eastern Ladakh is characterized by the high-altitude plateau of Changthang (Dame and Nusser, 2011).

The climate in Ladakh is typical of a high-altitude desert. Due to its location in the rain shadow of the Himalaya, the average annual precipitation is below 100 mm and relative humidity during the summer season averages only 40% in the upper Indus

valley (Leh). Furthermore, there are large seasonal and diurnal temperature fluctuations ranging from -28°C (occasionally -40°C) in winter to +35°C in summer. Typical monthly values recorded in Leh range from -2.8°C to -14°C in January and from +24.7°C to +10.2°C in July  (Hobley et al., 2010; Owen et al., 2006). The summer season is short (May-September) whereas the winter season is long (November-April). Vegetation cover is scarce and discontinuous with cropping areas being limited to the low altitude floors of river valleys, where anthropic irrigation is present (Hobley et al., 2012). Human settlements are scattered across the region at altitudes between 2600m and 4500m and are predominately situated around glacial streams (Dame and Nusser, 2011).

Demographic and Recent Historic Overview

Ladakh comprises two districts: the predominantly Muslim district of Kargil to the west and south, and the largely Buddhist district of Leh (Figure 6) in the central and eastern parts of the region (Goodall, 2004). Geographically situated on the western extension of the Tibetan plateau, Ladakh has cultural and linguistic affinities with Tibet (Rizvi, 1996). The population is sparse (236,539 – 2001 census), divided almost equally between the two districts. Over the past decades, Ladakh has faced a continuous increase in population with latest census data showing a yearly increase of 2.7% of total population for the Leh district between 1981 and 2001). The rate of growth is higher in the administrative capital of Leh (5.9% increase for the same period) (Goodall, 2004; Dame and Nuser, 2010). 

Before the partitioning and independence of India and Pakistan in 1947, the former Kingdom of Ladakh had been ruled by the Maharaja of Jammu and Kashmir for more than a century. Leh was a vital market centre along the trade routes connecting India with Central Asia and Tibet (Rizvi, 1996). However, the military confrontations between India and Pakistan in 1947-49 due to territorial disputes over Kashmir; further military hostilities in 1962 between China and India over the Aksai Chin region; the border wars between India and Pakistan in 1965 and 1971, the Siachen conflict since 1984 and the Kargil crisis in 1999 expanded the region’s geostrategic significance (Ali, 2002; Aggarwal 2004; Kreutzmann 2008). These border skirmishes have led in turn to the establishment of a large permanent military presence, and large investments in infrastructure, including the airport and road construction. These investments took place despite Ladakh being landlocked for more than six months a year due to the harsh winter, which in turn closes the only two roads connecting it to the outside world (ibid). The closure of international borders due to military skirmishes has led to a significant change in the local economy (e.g from subsidence agriculture and trade to cash economy powered by tourism, government subsidy programmes and imported goods from outside Ladakh). This reliance on external economies has exposed Ladakh to fluctuations in regional and international markets, turning it into a ‘mountain periphery’ (Michaud, 1996), whose destiny is controlled by a centralised, lowland political power (Skeldon 1985; Ives and Messerli, 1996). 

Ladakhi Mountain Agriculture

Due to the limited agricultural resource potential, Ladakhi people have sustained their livelihood using a “combined mountain agriculture” (Ehlers and Kreutzmann, 2000). Crop farming and animal husbandry together with gathering activities comprise the central pillars of livelihoods in the villages (ibid).  The key to agricultural production in this cold desert is the art of diverting water from the glacial streams through meticulously built canals towards farmland to grow staple crops such as barley and wheat, w

hich may in turn be rotated with peas and mustard. In addition, vegetables such as turnip, cabbage, potatoes, onions, carrots and green leafy vegetables are cultivated in kitchen gardens (Dame and Nuser, 2010). Trees like apricots, apples, willow and poplar are cultivated along the river channels or at the margins of arable lands, though large forested areas are lacking due to climatic conditions. These in turn are used for making tools and fodder for animals as well as for construction, and heating purposes (ibid). The collection of wild herbs, mainly for medicinal purposes adds to the land use pattern. Single cropping is most dominant as double-cropping can only be practiced below an altitude of 3000m (ibid).

Livestock comprises yak, dzo (a yak and cow crossbreed), cattle, sheep and goats. Animals are grazed on designated grasslands within oases or on high pastures during summer months, depending on the settlements’ environmental resources. Winter fodder requirements are met by growing and storing Alfafa (Medicago spp), natural grass, leaves and straw. There is an important relationship between people and animals in Ladakh as the latter are used for most essential farming activities such as to provide: i) dung for soil fertilization and occasional house heating, ii) draught power and transportation, and iii) animal products such as milk and meat products for the local diet. Overall, crop farming and animal husbandry are interdependent components of the Ladakhi food system.

Village activity is driven by seasonal patterns of agricultural production: pastoralists trade dairy, wool and, pashmina goat fibre to the Kashmiri region whereas the arable farming schedule is constrained by the short growing season (i.e. May to September) (Sherratt, undated). Sowing occurs between mid-April and mid-May whereas harvesting occurs between mid-August and September (LAHDC-Leh, 2012). As a result, farmers in Ladakh are extremely risk-averse in adopting untested technologies (Angchok and Srivastava, 2012). Property is divided according to agricultural requirements. Settlements have traditional and complex techniques for channel irrigation: water is allocated by village and household size, and if scarce, it is mediated by “Chhu-pon” (lord of the water – an elected village official). Due to the high value and insecurity of water, distribution can become heavily politicised (Angchok and Singh, 2006). 

Until recently, farmers grew and consumed their own grains, cereals and vegetables, prepared their own manure, seeds and other agricultural inputs, reared their own animals and prepared their own farms in an integrated and balanced manner as a response to Ladakh’s agro climatic conditions (LEDEG, 2016). However, low cropping intensity, less productivity, the short agriculture season and a changing economy due to politico-military drivers have resulted in the dependence of its growing population on imports of food grains, vegetables and spices from other parts of India and beyond. As Ladakh opens to the world, its traditional agricultural system and crops may face severe disruptions (ibid). Already, agriculture has taken a back seat to the rapid growth of tourism and its cash inputs into the region. 

Food Security in Ladakh: Overview and Trends

Food consumption in Ladakh has been primarily the result of a limited number of products derived from subsistence land-use and storage facilities in the cold arid desert. Typical meals are based on staple crops such as barley and wheat and combine peas, potatoes, turnip and green leafy vegetables and limited amount of dairy and meat products. Nomadic pastoralists on the other hand, consume a greater variety of animal products (ibid). In the past, food deficit was resolved through barter and trade; however at present, barter has a subordinate role while most goods are accessed at the market.

Previous studies in Ladakh documented several changes occurring since the 1970s such as: i) a decline in agriculture as the dominant land-use; ii) an increase in dietary diversity particularly during the summer months, but with a persistent seasonality in the availability and access to food (Nüsser and Clemens 1996; Sinclair and Ham, 2000). This in turn leads to periodic food insecurity and hidden hunger, particularly among vulnerable households. In addition, iii) land-use strategies have changed towards a more vegetable-intensive cultivation fuelled by various government programmes such as subsidised seeds, greenhouse construction and new technologies; iv) low marketing activities with access to markets depending on infrastructure and market institutions (Burli et al., 2008); v) rise of markets and shops; and vi) changing household traditions (rice is considered modern and the ration store is advantageous for direct product availability).

The Public Distribution System (PDS)

The Indian government’s main food control mechanism and antipoverty programme is the Public Distribution System (PDS) which distributes wheat and rice and also edible oils, kerosene, and sugar at subsidized prices to rural and urban households, predominately the poor (Kochar, 2005). It is currently one of India’s largest social programs, distributing commodities in excess of 300m Rs annually to about 10 million families (Planning Commission, 2002). The PDS evolved in the 1950s and 1960s, when the economy suffered from extensive nationwide shortages and fluctuating high food prices, particularly in urban areas. Its primary objective then was to provide an instrument for price stabilization. The increase in agricultural output enabled by the Green Revolution (in the early 1970s) significantly reduced the need for a programme that ensured universal access to food at “affordable” prices. Consequently, the justification for the financial subsidies of the PDS has increasingly been the welfare of the poor (Kochar, 2005). However, it has been frequently criticised for not addressing the issues of hidden hunger and the strong seasonality of dietary patterns. Furthermore, the programme has increased household dependency on subsidised goods and therefore contrary to programmes aiming at self-sufficiency, rendering the population vulnerable to changes and adjustments to the programme (Dame and Nusser, 2011).

Analysis and Discussion

The analysis and discussion that follows is structured around the key barriers and enablers to the adoption and diffusion of ATIs that emerged from the rich data gathered in the interviews, focus groups and through observations in the field. Interview and focus group data is referenced extensively, using the anonymous coding described above. Figures 13 and 15 illustrate key barriers and enablers along with their interrelationships based on coded themes emerging from the data.  The most significant of these are then discussed below:

Economic and Human Capital Barriers

Agricultural labour is an important factor affecting production in the traditional Ladakhi farming and comprises three types: family labour, hired labour and a combination of the two. Whilst agriculture remains central to the Ladakhi sustenance, as one respondent highlighted: ‘agriculture is part of life to keep us alive and healthy’ (I-13), labour availability (e.g. number of labourers needed to carry out farm work) has been rapidly declining since the 1970s (FG-19; 20; 21). This is primarily due to decreasing male labour, which has migrated out of agriculture in search of ‘better livelihoods’ in the city (I-1). In contrast, female labour, has been increasing at an annual growth rate of 2% (Baba et al., 2011) with important social consequences as highlighted by a respondent: ‘recent economic changes have had a profoundly marginalizing effect on the position of women in Ladakh; as men and young people flock to the city in search of jobs and schooling, women are being left on their own to tend the farms; as a result, their decision-making power has decreased while their workload increased’ (I-17). This may have negative implications for ATI adoption, as the remaining women and elderly farmers are more risk averse and less likely to consider long-term investments in the farm (Mauceri et al., 2005). Furthermore: ‘these days, one woman may do the work for four people and there are no men in the villages, as all are busy with government and tourism jobs in Leh’ (I-5). In fact, ‘even for young people who want to stay and farm their ancestral lands, there is a big social pressure to put kids in private schools rather than keep them in the government school in the village’ (ibid).  

Under these circumstances, the future of farming in Ladakh may become increasingly dependent on female labour, requiring in turn skill improvement through professional training (Baba et al., 2011), particularly in the context of adopting ATIs. This may prove challenging at present due to the lack of technical colleges or relevant programmes in Ladakh (C-6). Nevertheless, the need for capacity building programmes for rural females is slowly being addressed by local NGOs (e.g. WAL, LEHO, SECMOL). These organizations act as extension or change agents, providing a link between innovators and users of specific ATIs. This in turn may help reduce transaction costs incurred when sharing information about new ATIs with heterogeneous populations of farmers (Genius et al., 2010; Mwangi and Kariuki, 2015). However, if change agents are not focused on farmers' needs, accurate information about the benefits of ATIs is lost. Furthermore, socioeconomic pressures such as poor financial support for NGO projects, continuing illiteracy, and growing incomes in off-farm employment are often hindering their efforts. 

As the rural to urban migration and associated urbanisation continues to be promoted, agricultural systems and labour, and the standing of agriculture as a respectable profession are increasingly undermined (Norberg-Hodge, 2000). This may have implications for ATI adoption and food security as the employment of inexperienced labour, excessive work load on family members and poor labour division may ultimately result in lower productivity for crops and livestock (Baba et al., 2011) or failure of ATIs. For example, previous ATI projects in Puga Valley proved this in particular: ‘geothermal endeavours in the region in the 1990s included: a heating system (Figure 14) in winter for the people living in nearby villages as well as a mushroom and poultry farm; however, both projects failed because they employed inexperienced, foreign workforce from the lowlands that could not cope with the harsh winter’ (FG-20; 21). Furthermore, ‘nomadic people are inherently poor agriculturalists, as they lack practical knowledge on how to grow crops (I-24); this is mainly because the nomadic livelihood is dependent on animals and not crops’ (FG-20). 

The seasonal migration of rural nomadic children to urban private schools may have other implications as exemplified by the case of the Changpa people in the Chanthang plains. Whilst nomads realised the importance of education thanks to the various awareness-generating initiatives carried out by the Puga Nomadic School, they are nonetheless concerned about decreasing labour availability because ‘they lose an extra hand at work by sending kids to school’ (C-7). This in turn may have food security implications as labour scarcity results in less intensive herding patterns and thus lower productivity levels (Baba et al., 2011). One informant observed that: ‘access to food used to be high in the past because of the self-reliant and sustainable agri-system that the people used; however due to changing priorities and lifestyles, food access has become problematic in recent years’ (I-8). The issue of food availability is further exacerbated by the lack of storage facilities, which in turn leads to most food being consumed in early- and mid-winter, leaving little for late winter and early spring (C-7). 

A key factor affecting adoption-diffusion of ATIs is the net gain to the adopter, inclusive of usage costs (Foster and Rosenzweig, 2010). The amount of money that a farmer can (readily) mobilise has a great effect on the choices that can be made in terms of investment in inputs (e.g. farm equipment, buildings and livestock) (AgriCultures-Network, 2016). In Ladakh, a widespread barrier to adopting ATIs is the poor access to financial capital. Due to the small scale, isolated and subsistence nature of farms in Ladakh, it is difficult for farmers without collateral to get access to credit from the banks or other similar funding schemes (Baba et al., 2011). This is particularly true for OPEX as the artificial glacier project highlighted: ‘Funding is big problem, - without money, people won’t build the glaciers; the challenge is to develop a design that reduces labour requirements especially during maintenance activities; the aim is to facilitate automation of ATI to reduce costs’ (I-10). However, higher mechanisation and sophistication is usually associated with increased CAPEX and OPEX and thus may ultimately be a barrier, particularly when there is a lack of economic instruments to buffer the costs. Moreover, mechanised ATI such as the Arahant project involve higher OPEX and CAPEX than traditional human or animal powered that is beyond the economic capacity of the average rural farmer.

Previous empirical studies suggested that the adoption of ATIs is scale-dependent (Bonabana-Wabbi, 2002; Lavinson, 2013). For example, large farms, can afford to devote part of their land to experiment with new ATIs and eventually adopt them (Uaiene et al., 2009), whilst small farms may adopt input-intensive ATI solutions (e.g. labour- or land- saving ATI) (Mwangi and Kariuki, 2015). Farmers with small landholdings may adopt land-saving ATI such as greenhouse technology as a solution to overcome resource limitations and increase agricultural production (Harper et al., 1990). 

Institutional and Regulatory Barriers

For the last four decades, Ladakh has been increasingly exposed to modern influences including the Green Revolution, industrialization, and infrastructure development (Norberg-Hodge, 2000). The introduction of the (PDS) has systematically undermined the local agricultural economy as it became cheaper to buy food imported from the lowlands than to grow it locally - an unimaginable concept within the traditional economy (ibid). As one Ladakhi farmer said: ‘practising farming in Ladakh has moved from being a crucial requirement for survival to being an element of prestige’ (I-24). Food excess became a seasonal (summer) reality in some places (e.g Leh) as observed by one respondent: ‘there is so much subsidized food that there is little incentive to grow it yourself’ (I-5). Furthermore, farmers who had previously grown a variety of crops and kept a few animals to provide for themselves, either directly or through the local economy, are increasingly pressurised to grow a single cash crop for distant markets (ibid). As a result, they become dependent on forces beyond their control (e.g. unreliable transportation networks, oil prices and fluctuations in international finance). Over the course of time, inflation obliges them to increase production, in order to secure income and purchasing power for what they used to grow themselves (ibid). This is a development process occurring throughout the world, which has generally displaced and marginalised self-reliant, local economies and small farmers and has hindered the diffusion of ATI (Kwa, 2001). In the industrialised world, more than 90% of the population has been pulled away from agriculture (Norberg-Hodge, 2000). 

For example, in Saboo village, there used to be 6000 sheep and goats, which generated plentiful meat, milk and manure used for feeding the villagers and maintaining soil fertility, at a minimum expenditure. The introduction of subsidies and subsequently cheap food products have reduced the market attractiveness of local crops The subsidy supply centre that was opened in the village resulted in two things: i) people reduced their agricultural activities and outputs and ii) they changed their food habits (e.g. from a diet rich in barley and wheat to one dominated by rice). Under these circumtances rural people started to migrate to the cities such as Leh in search of employment (e.g. Indian army, government, I-9). 

ATIs may face further barriers such as uncertainty in respect to the level of cooperation with the government. Whilst some respondents suggested that a government partnership might be beneficial for facilitating ATIs implementation by granting permission and reducing bureaucracy, it nonetheless raises important ownership concerns, which in turn might affect the overall quality of the project’s outputs and deliverables. This may be further exacerbated by the prevalence of corruption. As one respondent commented: ‘foreign and government business initiatives should not be top-down, but rather should try and empower the community; unfortunately, the quality of previous endeavours in Ladakh has not been consistent over time: the initial presentation is good, we accept the initiative, but later the project decays’ (C-15). Further research needs to be done in the area of institutional mechanisms to assess how to effectively engage decision makers in the development and implementation of ATIs and improve bridging social capital.

Market and Social Capital Barriers

A fundamental barrier to the adoption-diffusion of ATIs in Ladakh is associated with value chain inefficiencies, particularly concerning activities occurring within the ‘post-farmgate” stage (i.e. the flow of products, knowledge and information taking place between the farm and the final consumer;) (Kwa, 2001; Conway, 2012). Whilst in industrialised countries there has been a systematic concentration in ‘added value’ activities particularly in the area of processing and marketing (Ericksen, 2008), in Ladakh the situation is quite different as one innovator stated: ‘it’s very difficult to find skilled labour that can both understand marketing processes and is motivated to get involved in agriculture’ (I-5). The same applies for medicinal plants: ‘there is a lack of understanding and awareness on the part of the nomads in regards to the value, and packaging procedures for medicinal plants’ (ibid). Furthermore, access to foreign markets and facilitating smooth exports are hindered by numerous and costly intermediaries: ‘selling sea buckthorn berries to countries such as England is profitable and the market is large, but there are too many intermediaries in the supply chain, which reduce revenues for the Ladakhi farmer’ (ibid).

The challenges mentioned above are caused by complex socioeconomic and institutional interactions; however the lack of organisation among farmers is the fundamental root cause. This in turn may be due to declining bonding social capital associated with family and community nucleation, which limits the exchange of ideas, trust and information (Mignouna et al., 2011). Diminishing social networks limit farmers’ ability to find resources that enable them to position themselves within a value chain (Trienekens, 2011). Social capital decline is also closely interrelated with declining labour as one respondent mentioned: ‘the Ladakhi farming system used to be excellent in the past; there was high community and family collaboration to work the land (e.g. 3-4 families working together, elderly and children, sharing labour and equipment such as dzo, and growing what they needed to consume in a year); now there is nobody to keep the dzo, or farm the land’ (G-11). This may have economic implications since reducing community cohesiveness increases the transaction costs of working together and reduces trust that otherwise would enable communities to overcome societal dilemmas (AG4Impact, 2016). The decline of social capital is particularly concerning for rural communities comprising illiterate, low income smallholder farmers as the disappearing social networks threaten the safety nets that enable them to cope with shocks, particularly when formal types of risk management such as credit or insurance are unavailable (Pretty and Smith, 2004; Woolcock, 2007).

Furthermore, due to the lack of cooperatives, farmers have limited potential to engage in collective action to increase bargaining power, marketing and processing capacity of farm products and access financial resources, agricultural inputs, information, and output markets (World Bank, 2001). In addition, they may encounter difficulties with improving product and service quality and reducing risks (ibid). Furthermore, the limited access to information is an important overall barrier because it: i) hinders the capacity to learn about the existence and use of ATIs; ii) increases the uncertainty about their performance; and iii) facilitates a subjective, rather than objective evaluation of ATIs thus constraining a rational adoption process (Caswell, et al., 2001; Mwangi and Kariuki, 2015). Therefore, agricultural cooperatives are an important tool for empowering members economically and socially through involvement in decision-making processes that create additional rural employment opportunities, or enable individuals to become more resilient to economic and environmental shocks (Sorensen, 2000). 

Behavioural and Psychological Barriers

There is a psychological dimension as well: people are increasingly afraid of seeming backward and everything traditional is beginning to be seen that way (e.g. agriculture). Furthermore, the more the government does for villagers, the less they feel inclined to help themselves (Norberg-Hodge, 2000). For example, ‘people are becoming lethargic and lazy and only interested in easy, or quick money, particularly the youth’ (I-10). In addition, subsidies reduce individual and collective readiness as one respondent commented: ‘the PDS made people care less about things and do less from their own initiative’ (I-5). Classic examples of such behaviour include recent failed tree planting and revegetation projects:

1 - ‘people took government subsidies to plant trees – they built 70% of the protection walls but never finished them, then they planted the trees, brought animals in, which started eating the trees and that was the end of it’ (ibid); 

2 – South of the Indus river, there were many empty farm fields; people received government subsidies to build terraces and revegetate these lands; they took the money and construction materials despite not wanting to farm more land’ (ibid).

Such behaviour demonstrates that attitudes towards resources and the economy have changed. The population of Ladakh is becoming ‘spoiled’ (G-4) as a government informant commented: ‘we used to be self-sufficient, but the easy money through tourism changed people’s view and understanding about the economy, and made them less motivated to work in agriculture’ (ibid). This is most prevalent among the young generation, who are attracted by the glamour of tourism and the material gains that come with it. This in turn further contributes to growing labour inequality and decreasing social capital. As men and children migrate to the city in search of well-paid jobs and private education respectively, the remaining women are either poorly incentivised to farm the lands or simply overwhelmed by the amount of work that needs to be done, which in turn results in diminishing opportunity to socialise. This is in contrast to the traditional agriculture, where work is founded in cooperation: labour, animals and farm instruments are routinely shared, workload is minimised and the small-scale economy helps to strengthen community ties.

In addition, people’s perception of what is an acceptable career has changed (ibid). Parents in rural settlements want their children to get a government job; business jobs are not respected, because they are considered ‘insecure’ and farming jobs are seen as ‘backward’, ‘limited’ or lacking ‘added value’ (C-6). Agriculture is increasingly perceived as  ‘laborious’, ‘boring’, ‘costly’ and ‘unproductive’ (I-1). This was further clarified by another respondent: ‘the agricultural department is the expert; whereas the farmer is the innovator; the former is mostly boring office job, whereas the latter is poorly paid; why venture in farming under these circumstances?’ (I-3). Changing people’s attitudes and beliefs is a hard and time-consuming process as one respondent emphasised: ‘you have to make people understand what you are trying to achieve’.

Further psychological barriers may derive from religious and cultural beliefs particularly in regards to fear of technology. Ladakhis have a strong relationship with their land, based on the ‘principle of interdependence’ in Buddhism. As one respondent highlighted: ‘humans are subject to, and part of nature’; some people may think that the ATI is ‘against the law of nature if technology is too complicated or bizarre’ (C-14). Genetically modified crops  provide a good example as some ‘people may believe that humans should not change nature around us; however, bacteria and plants have always influenced each other, changing DNA throughout the history of the natural world; (e.g. bacterial implants in sweet potatoes in Africa have suffered genetic modification due to the preferred selection of this particular crop by farmers)’ (T-23). There is much opposition to biotechnology because people don't want scientists to manipulate their food; however, such beliefs are ‘founded on misinformation and media propaganda’ (ibid). 

An interesting argument put forward by one innovator suggested suggested that excessive marketing and advertising leads to ‘distorted perceptions of success’. For example, the success of the ‘ice stupa’ prototype built at SECMOL was widely advertised in national and international press, fuelling in turn high expectations in the public and the innovators. This led to unrealistic business targets and deliverables and increased social pressure to meet them. ‘Peoples’ expectations grew fast due to the good marketing and branding of the ice stupa; these expectations became increasingly hard to meet as we experienced several failures since SECMOL; now people think that the project is failing’ (I-8). 

Technological and Organisational Barriers

Additional barriers to ATI include the lack of specialised raw materials in the region (e.g hydroponic nutrients) and maintenance challenges particularly for technologically complex systems such as greenhouses. The latter is probably derived from the unskilled labour. A classic example was provided by FG-19: ‘ventilators were introduced in solar greenhouses using local materials, which needed to be operated day and night but the farmers did not care about these sensitivities due to lack of understanding of operational requirements and system benefits’. Also, ‘the cost for replacing polyethylene sheet for one greenhouse is about 4000 Rs and lasts for about 4-5 years; subsistence farmers in remote villages often cannot afford to replace it, whereas larger greenhouses which grow crops for the market in cities like Leh have no such problems’ (I-9).

This suggests that ATIs need to be farmer friendly according to the Ladakhi agricultural principles and training and education programmes must accompany the implementation procedure. In other words, Ladakhi farmers may be more likely to adopt ATI as a package, rather than selectively adopting components of technologies. However, one respondent emphasised that the ‘farming community has become more selective in choosing technologies due to growing interest to understand the functionality of ATI’ (G-11). Furthermore, Ladakhi farmers may be more likely to adopt an ATI using a combination of personal factors (e.g. human values, experience, and education) in addition to access to information in utility maximization as described by the ‘adopter perception theoretical model’ in Prager and Posthumus, (2010). 

Enablers to the Adoption-Diffusion of ATIs

Environmental and Cultural Enablers

A fundamental concern for Ladakhi food security is derived from climate change impacts such as: precipitation and temperature changes; glacial recession; disappearance of freshwater springs; and ultimately exacerbating water scarcity in an already arid region (I-1). Furthermore, climate variability has been increasing the occurrence of pests and diseases in agriculture (a rather novel phenomenon in Ladakh), which directly affects crop productivity (I-3). Whilst environmental pressures may well form barriers to venturing into agriculture altogether, they nevertheless contribute to strengthening the motivation of farmers and decision makers to find new ways of adapting agri-systems to these environmental threats.

Adapting to environmental constraints has been occurring throughout the history of Ladakh (e.g. the elaborate system of meltwater channels irrigating the fields). Recent, and unprecedented changes in glacier dynamics have forced people to find new solutions such as the ‘artificial glacier’. This innovative, locally specific, water management solution provides irrigation water to the fields, replenishes groundwater resources and contributes to reducing water disputes amongst neighbours. Such positive results strengthen social capital and increase credibility and community acceptance of the farming innovation and the organization implementing it. The project also emphasises that local people can be resourceful and resilient as one respondent highlighted: ‘Ladakhi people are resilient to climatic and environmental change because they lived for many hundreds of years in a harsh environment and developed unique adaptation techniques; adaptation is our second nature’ (G-4).

The awareness of interdependencies between the human and natural spheres is well represented in the beliefs and concepts of sustainability and self-reliance, deeply embedded in the local Buddhist culture, as one informant highlighted: ‘environment is the most important asset of people and all people need to take care of it’; ‘there is a strong interdependence between people and the environment and a good karmic relation must be maintained, particularly in respect to farming’ (C-22). This suggests that religion and in turn monasteries could be used as a medium to spread both environmental messages and promote ATI. This seemed to be an effective approach in the case of the ice stupa, thus contrasting previous studies, such as Mortreux and Barnett (2009), which illustrated that religion impedes residents’ propensity to adapt. In this study, residents of the Pacific island of Tuvalu cited the Biblical story of Noah as evidence that God would not allow further flooding, and thus many citizens did not see the need for future migration (ibid).

However, there are limits to adaptation. ‘With increasingly dangerous climate change, population migration from Ladakh will be ultimately inevitable because they will not be able to survive traditionally in ever-increasingly arid desert unless people develop crops that are more resilient to drought stress’ (T-23). A solution could be as follows: ‘everyday products should be grown locally, sustainably and organically but those that are required in large quantities such as staples should be grown using genetic engineering or chemical fertilizers. These techniques will increase production’ (ibid). Furthermore, investments in tech-aids such as adequate weather reports are also essential. All of this may suggest that ATIs need to be delivered as a local specific package.

Market Enablers

A promising enabler to ATI diffusion in Ladakh comprises the (unmeasured) local market potential for organic products, vegetables, seeds and renewable energy. In Ladakh, there is surprisingly good resource potential to produce various seeds, leafy green vegetables and some fruit during the summer period. Seed cultivation is facilitated by cross pollination, the limited occurrence of pests compared to the Indian lowlands and the easier transportation logistics compared to ripe and/or processed products (e.g. apricot jam jars). Furthermore, a growing market for vegetables cultivation is provided by the army and tourism as highlighted by one respondent: ‘the army consumes 23000 tonnes of vegetables a year; Ladakh supplies only 5000 tonnes. The market potential is 18000 tonnes; add on this the seasonal tourism market potential estimated at 10000 metric tonnes’ (I-9). 

Furthermore, Ladakh experiences excellent solar access throughout the year (5530 Whr/m2/day), (Jacobson, 2000), which means high potential for greenhouse crop cultivation and electricity generation from solar energy. In addition, the introduction of eco-villages may contribute to developing the local economy. For example, the apricot economy of a village near Leh used to be valued at 3.5mil USD/year. After the introduction of eco-village practices in the village, the apricot revenue increased to 7mil USD/year (I-9). However, good access to markets is essential for profitability. This may be a problem in Ladakh as both food distribution systems and transportation infrastructure are poor, meaning that any successful ATI will have to be accessible to the nearby urban market (e.g. Leh). 

Behavioural and Psychological Enablers

The key enabler for ATI as most respondents (F-12, FG-21; 20) suggested is having passion for agriculture and being exposed to it from an early age in order to generate an appreciation of its importance and associated activities. ‘Having passion for farming is probably the most important factor to pursue a career in agriculture (G-11)’. For such people, the vision for the future (e.g. after retirement) includes getting involved in a sustainable agricultural practice (e.g. organic farming) in order to address food insecurity. Despite the mainstream livelihood options at present, such people believe that ‘farming is the only long-term sustainable livelihood option due the presence of military and political conflicts and associated border issues, which can hinder tourism at any time’ (FG-21). 

Farmers with previous exposure to ATIs as well as foreign intervention (e.g. business, tourism) generally believe that ‘western technology is good because it is foreign’ (C-16). They are also aware of the need to promote environmental conservation and sustainable intensification of agriculture. Farmers who have been experimenting with industrial techniques promoted by the GR (e.g. inorganic fertilizers, pesticides, machinery) (Kwa, 2001) believe that they are satisfactory for short-term endeavours due to associated higher yields, faster growth and higher profits. However, using inorganic fertilisers and pesticides is not sustainable in the long-term (I-13). Organic farming is preferentially preferred because of: i) the combination of environmentally friendly practices (incluing a role for livestock); ii) a high level of associated biodiversity; iii) the preservation of natural resources; iv) the application of high animal welfare standards; and v) using a production method comprising natural substances and processes (FG-20; European Commission, 2015). 

In contrast, ‘crops grown using inorganic fertilisers are lacking nutrients and are not resistant to pests’ (I-13). Furthermore ‘the increasing use of chemical farming in Ladakh reduces soil fertility, contaminates groundwater, and affects human and animal health by altering the immune, endocrine and nervous system functions’ (I-3). Depending on other parties to provide processed food products, seeds, fertilisers, pesticides and machinery contributes to food insecurity due in part to the inherent isolation and inaccessibility of the region and subsequent transportation challenges (e.g. particularly in winter) as well as the increased vulnerability to market fluctuations. As one farmer commented: ‘what will happen if they stop sending food, when the roads are blocked or the weather is bad and planes can’t fly?’ (I-13). In addition, ‘if indigenous seeds are lost due to hybrid seeds flooding the local market, people will become increasingly dependent on external forces controlling prices, quantity and quality of food’ (ibid). 

Economic and Regulatory Enablers

Off-farm income has been shown to have a positive effect on ATI adoption as the case of I-13 exemplifies: the farmer manages a successful guesthouse and organic farm in its premises, providing food products to customers grown in his garden. He is experimenting with new crops (e.g. medicinal plants) and has highlighted that he is likely to try new ATI, given his previous successful experience and associated financial benefits. In addition, off-farm income may substitute for borrowed capital in rural economies, where credit markets are either missing or dysfunctional, thus overcoming credit constraints (Reardon et al., 2007; Freeman and Ellis, 2004). For example, I-13 mentioned that the income from tourism is providing him with liquid capital for purchasing productivity-enhancing inputs such as organic seeds.

An additional economic enabler is the increasing availability of foreign funding schemes and international aid such as the World Bank structural adjustment programmes, and EU - Geres funding (I-3). The net result of these schemes is enabling ATI development and generating income among communities through various livelihood and food security projects (ibid). Overwhelmingly, informants have consolidated the understanding that subsidies and insurance systems are the most important economic instruments required to promote agriculture and motivate farmers (T-23). However, they should be delivered in a way that promotes sustainable intensification (SI) of agriculture. In other words, they must: i) optimise production in both quality and quantity relative to available inputs (e.g. labour, land, water etc.); ii) improve farmer’s livelihoods, and iii) minimise negative externalities (e.g. pollution, depletion of soil and water resources; decreasing social capital) (NewForesight, 2013). 

When asked about whether they would adopt ATI such as the Arahant Project, a family of farmers, which diversified their livelihood to tourism, suggested that if a successful prototype is built that shows robustness, sustainable design, simplicity in replication, proven compatibility with traditional agricultural techniques, and limited environmental damage, the family would accept and support it (ibid). They also suggested that community workshops and discussions would be suitable to raise awareness and exposure before people adopt the project. This has been confirmed by a government official highlighting that: ‘technology adoption is slow at first but if proven concepts exist and are seen by people, then replication and adoption is fast’ (G-11), suggesting that if the prototype can clarify the resource and maintenance requirements, technical functionality, and the metrics surrounding the outputs of ATI, adoption-diffusion processes can run smoothly. Furthermore, the neighbour perception would be such that, if successful, people would adopt and replicate the ATI (F-2; I-5; I-9; FG-19). However, while this may seem like an enabler, care should be taken to limit adoption externalities within social networks such as the appearance of ‘free riding on the neighbour’s costly experimentation with the ATI’ (Forster and Rosenzveig, 2005). This is particularly true in Ladakh, as people are characterised by poor readiness and ‘reluctance to do something different for the first time; however, once they see an innovation working well, the adoption and replication follow naturally’ (I-5).

Technological Enablers

Technological enablers are closely interlinked with farmers’ perception and include a genuine interest in ATI as a means to improve their lives. This is probably because of the strong sustainability and environmental adaptation concepts embedded in their culture (e.g. prayer wheels symbolizing moving water; chortens referring to the interdependence in the universe; complex meltwater irrigation channels etc).  Multiple studies have emphasized the role that technology characteristics play in the adoption process (Mwangi and Kariuki, 2015). Trialabilty or the degree to which a potential adopter can experiment with something new before adopting it is particularly relevant (Doss, 2003). If a technology has been proven to be consistent with farmers’ needs and compatible with their environment, they are likely to adopt it because it is perceived as a positive investment. This is particulate true for the Arahant Project as one focus group emphasized: ‘Arahant is an exciting idea due to the small environmental effects and beneficial socioeconomic development. It will be an important project in the region considering the constraints to local agriculture. The Arahant greenhouse is most needed in the Chantang plains” (FG-20). However, farmers should be included in the development and evaluation process of the ATI as I-3 commented: ‘facilitating community involvement or, in other words, demonstrating the social mission of the project is essential because people need to feel that they are contributing to the project and that their opinions are considered in the research and development stage’. This will enable the identification of the most suitable location, farm size, inputs and outputs based on the local circumstances.

Human Capital Enablers

Numerous studies have confirmed that education level in farmers increases their ability to obtain process and use information relevant to adopting ATI (Mignouna et al., 2011; Lavison, 2013). This is because education influences farmers’ attitudes and thoughts, making them more open, rational and able to objectively analyse the benefits of ATIs (Waller et al., 1998). This eases the introduction process of ATI, ultimately accelerating the adoption process (Adebiyi and Okunlola, 2010). Therefore, facilitating education and/or training sessions for farmers, irrespective of age and gender could accelerate the adoption-diffusion of ATI. Alternative education initiatives such as SECMOL or Puga Nomadic School and associated outreach programmes in rural regions of Ladakh are available local solutions, capable of addressing this issue.  By teaching students about SI techniques, such schools may help build a new generation of educated farmers. 

Whilst at present, the young generation is not motivated to pursue agriculture as a livelihood option, the increasing availability of ‘automated technologies’ such as drones, information communication technologies etc. might motivate technology-driven individuals. This may be useful considering that young farmers are typically less risk-averse than older farmers and more likely to try new technologies (Mwangi and Kariuki, 2015). However, it is important first to build the necessary political, economic and social space for such programmes and to meet people’s demands as emphasized by one informant: ‘SECMOL offers people what they want and thus meets demand’ it is responsive to what people requested in terms of academic courses (e.g. the programme “for kids who fail” takes place during a time of the year when there is no one else providing courses); there is therefore little competition’ (I-5). 

Conclusion

The study identified a sharp decline in agriculture in Ladakh both as a land use and livelihood option. This is primarily due to increasing shortage of male and youth labour due to rural-to-urban migration and subsequent off-farm income opportunities. In particular: i) the seemingly glamorous sophistication in non-farming jobs; ii) negative attitudes of the educated youth towards agriculture; iii) unattractive physical exertion in farming and iv) the employment opportunities in the government, tourism and military following the post Kargil war period (Baba et al., 2011). In addition, poor access to capital and conflicting financial priorities, market inefficiencies particularly in respect to value chains and lack of organization in farmers, high rural illiteracy, government bureaucracy and corruption, and unsustainable development policies are further barriers that require attention. 

Another challenge is the rapidly changing nature of agriculture practices in Ladakh, particularly the decline in pastoralism and the change in the types of crops being grown. Climate change and globalization are powerful drivers of change, which have been undermining the traditional nomadic and subsistence agriculture and have favored farming practices, which are not culturally specific.

Nevertheless, ATIs adoption-diffusion may be facilitated through education and sustainable training programmes. Any ATI should be implemented as a package comprising on-going technical and managerial support together with training and education to facilitate effective understanding of operational requirements. Demonstrating compatibility between the traditional Ladakhi farming and ATI is key and can be realised by combining traditional and modern techniques. In addition, small-scale, simple to replicate, farmer-friendly and robust systems, preceded by prototypes, are essential enablers to convince farmers to adopt ATIs and subsequently facilitate permission from the government. The inclusion of communities in the research and development stages of the ATIs is critical. Prototypes may also benefit from a strong neighbour effect in Ladakh, which could mitigate the poor readiness of people and accelerate adoption-diffusion activities. 

The lessons deriving from the experience of existing ATIs in Ladakh suggest that future ATIs such as the Arahant greenhouses should first address urban food insecurity and raise wide-scale public awareness about the project before implementation. During the first stage of the project, implementers should demonstrate the technical, economic and social feasibility of the project though, easy to replicate prototypes. If successful, the system can be scaled up across the region using a combination of economic instruments and advertising tools (e.g. radio). Vegetables and fodder greenhouses may address malnutrition and the shifting local socio-economy, land use and production systems in the nomadic lands of Chanthang. In particular, additional fodder could help sustain the increasing livestock population (e.g. goats, sheep, due to growing pashmina wool and meat demands). This in turn could reduce overgrazing concerns and the declining yak and horse populations, as a result of increasing use of motor vehicles for transportation (Namgail et al., 2007).

Adoption is a learning process comprising various aspects including collection, integration and evaluation of new information to allow better decision-making in respect to innovation (Pannell et al., 2006). The specific characteristics of the local environment, people and the technology are crucial factors affecting adoption. Overall, informants seemed opened-minded towards ATIs, which are expected to be agro-economically beneficial, and generate employment opportunities, whilst also providing an example of green entrepreneurship (C-6).

This study also suggests several several policy recommendations: 

·       In order to motivate young and rural people and mitigate the laborious and seasonal nature of local agriculture, economic policy instruments could help mechanise agriculture with sustainable, small-scale ATIs that bring added value to the food production system and address food insecurity sustainably. 

·       Innovations need to be site- and farm size- specific, and farming automation/tools should substitute the declining human labour. 

·       The increasing role of women in agriculture needs to be recognized and supported through appropriate training and equipment design.

·       Integration of production and marketing activities through value addition and other post-harvest management practices to secure livelihood for agricultural labour by engaging them for the greater part of the year.

·       Encouragement of micro agri-enterprises such as vegetable cultivation, home based processing units, apiculture at farm level, training and consultancy services, could also provide people with agriculture-based off-farm employment.

Further research is needed in the area of value chains particularly to identify the optimal configuration enabling smallholder farmers to gain a greater share of their value and assume fewer risks. This is essential to enable them to engage more efficiently with value chains and gain added value for improving their livelihoods, whilst reducing their risks and increasing their resilience (Agri4Impact, 2016). 

Future studies could analyse the patterns of interaction among the activities, external drivers and outcomes of ATIs in more depth so as to adequately understand emerging properties and their cause and effect. This is particularly true for the nomadic lands of Chanthang, with respect to the emerging hypothesis that ATIs in such regions might change their transhumance way of life and be difficult to implement because of cultural attitudes and skills. Exploring this hypothesis with further case study research on a multi-scale level will enable the identification of critical drivers and an evaluation of trade-offs.  

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgements are due for the priceless support from the Ladakhi people, particularly Mr Imran Hussain, Mr Gulzar Hussain, Mr Zubir Ahmad, Mr Afzal Hussain, Mr Tashi, and Mr Chewang Norphel, who gave invaluable logistical support to carry out the fieldwork for this study. I would also like to thank all the farmers, innovators and government officials that participated and shared their perceptions and motives in this study. Without their involvement, this study would not have been possible.

References 

Ade Freeman, H., Ellis, F. and Allison, E. (2004), Livelihoods and Rural Poverty Reduction in Kenya. Development Policy Review, 22: 147–171. 

Adebiyi, S., Okunlola, J. (2010). Factors affecting Adoption of Cocoa Rehabilitation Techniques in Oyo State of Nigeria; Proceedings of the 18th Annual Congress of the Nigerian Rural Sociological Association of Nigeria. FUTA. Akure, Nigeria.

Aggarwal, R. (2004). Beyond Lines of Control. Performance and Politics on the Disputed Borders of Ladakh, India. Durham: Duke University Press.

Agricultures Network. (2016). Available from: http://www.agriculturesnetwork.org/. [Accessed on: 03.09.2016]

Agriculture For Impact. (2016). Available from: http://ag4impact.org/. [Accessed on: 03.09.2016].

Ali, A. (2002). A Siachen Peace Park: The Solution to a Half-Century of International Conflict? Mountain Research and Development, 22(4), 316–319.

Angchok D., and Srivastava R. (2012). ‘Technology Intervention and Repercussion among High Altitude Community of Ladakh: A Case Study of Trench Greenhouse’. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education Special Issue, 1(1) pp. 268-271. 

Angchok, D., and Singh, S. (2006). Traditional irrigation and water distribution system in Ladakh. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 5(3) pp.397-402

Baba, S. H., Wani, M. H., Shaheen, F. A., Zargar, B. A., & Kubrevi, S. S. (2011). Scarcity of Agricultural Labour in Cold-Arid Ladakh: Extent, Implications, Backward Bending and Coping Mechanism. Agricultural Economics Research, 24, 391–400.

Basit, T., (2003). Manual or Electronic? The Role of Coding in Qualitative Data Analysis. Educational Research, 45(2).

Beebe, J.  (1995). Basic Concepts and Techniques of Rapid Appraisal. Human Organization: Spring 1995, Vol. 54, No. 1, pp. 42-51. 

Bonabana-Wabbi J. (2002). Assessing Factors Affecting Adoption of Agricultural Technologies: The Case of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in Kumi District, Msc. Thesis Eastern Uganda. 

Botha, N. and Atkins, K. (2005). An assessment of five different theoretical frameworks to study the adoption of innovations. NZARES Conference Paper, New Zealand. 1-18.

Buerli, M., Aw-Hassan, A., and Rachidi, Y. L. (2008). The Importance of Institutions in Mountainous Regions for Accessing Markets: An Example from the Moroccan High Atlas. Mountain Research and Development, 28(3-4), 233–239.

Caswell, M., Fuglie, K., Ingram, C. (2001). Adoption of agricultural production practices: Lessons learned from the US Department of Agriculture Area Studies Project. US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, AER-792. 

Conley, Timothy G., and Christopher R. Udry. (2010). "Learning about a New Technology: Pineapple in Ghana."American Economic Review, 100(1): 35-69. 

Conway, G. (2012). One Billion Hungry, Can We Feed The World? Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 2nd Edition. London. Sage Publications Ltd.

Dame, J., and Nüsser, M. (2011). Food security in high mountain regions: Agricultural production and the impact of food subsidies in Ladakh, Northern India. Food Security, 3(2), 179–194. 

Doss, C.R. (2003).Understanding Farm Level Technology Adoption: Lessons Learned from_CIMMYT’s_ Microsurveys in Eastern Africa. CIMMYT Economics Working Paper 03-07. Mexico, D.F.: CIMMYT.

Garforth, C., McKemey, K., Rehman, T., Tranter, R., Cooke, R., Park, J., and Yates, C. (2006). Farmers’ attitudes towards techniques for improving oestrus detection in dairy herds in South West England. Livestock Science, 103(1), 158–168. 

Genius, M., Koundouri, M., Nauges, C and Tzouvelekas, V. (2010). Information Transmission in Irrigation Technology Adoption and Diffusion: Social Learning, Extension Services and Spatial Effects.

Goodall, S. K. (2004). Rural-to-urban Migration and Urbanization in Leh, Ladakh: A Case Study of Three Nomadic Pastoral Communities. Mountain Research and Development, 24(3), 220–227.

Ehlers, E., and Kreutzmann, H. (2000). High Mountain Ecology and Economy: Potential and Constraints. In E. Ehlers & H. Kreutzmann (Eds.), High Mountain Pastoralism in Northern Pakistan (Vol. 132, Erdkundliches Wissen) (pp. 9–36). Stuttgart: Steiner Verlag.

Ericksen, P. J. (2008). Conceptualizing food systems for global environmental change research. Global Environmental Change, 18(1), 234–245. 

European Commission. (2015). Glossary: Organic Farming. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/glossary/organic-farming_en.htm. [Accessed on: 03.09.2016]. Parliament, the European Economic, Social Committee, the Committee of the regions. Brussels, 26 June 2007.

Flachs, Andrew. 2016. "Redefining Success: The Political Ecology of Genetically Modified and Organic Cotton as Solutions to Agrarian Crisis." Journal of Political Ecology 23 (1): 49--70.

Foster, A., and Rosenzweig, M. R. (2010). Barriers to Farm Profitability in India: Mechanization, Scale and Credit Markets, (September).

Freeman, H. A., and Ellis, F. E. A. (2004). Livelihoods and Rural Poverty Reduction in Kenya. Development Policy Review. 22(2), 147–171. 

Harper, D.S.; Mann, P.H.; and Rengier S. (1990): Measurement of Dietary and Dentifrice Effects Upon Calculus Accumulation in the Domestic Ferret, J Dent Res 69:447-450

Henrich, J and McElreath R. (2002). Are Peasants Risk-Averse Decision Makers? Current Anthropology, 43, 1, 172-181.

Heinreich, J., Boyd, R., Bowless, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., Gintis, H., and Richard McElreath. (2001). In Search of Homo Economicus: Behavioral Experiments in 15 Small-Scale Societies. The American Economic Review, 91(2), 73-78. 

Hobley, D. E. J., Sinclair, H. D., Mudd, S. M, and Cowie, P. A. (2010). Processes, rates and time scales of fluvial response in an ancient post-glacial landscape of the northwest Indian Himalaya, Geological Society of American Bulletin. 122: 1569-1584.

Hobley, D. E. J., Sinclair, H. D., and Mudd, S. M. (2012). Reconstruction of a major storm event from its geomorphic signature: the Ladakh floods, 6 August 2010. Geology v. 40 (6) p. 483-486.

Howden, S. M., Soussana, J.-F., Tubiello, F. N., Chhetri, N., Dunlop, M., and Meinke, H. (2007). Adapting agriculture to climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104(50), 19691–19696. 

Ives, J. D. and B. Messerli. (1989). The Himalayan Dilemma. Reconciling Development and Conservation. London, UK: Routledge.

Jacob, E. (1987). Traditions of qualitative research: A review. Review of Educational Research, 57, 1-50.

Jacobson, A. (2000). Solar Measurements for Ladakh, India. Proceedings of the 24th National Renewable Energy Convention 2000 of the Solar Energy Society of India, Mumbai.

Jiduc, S. (2016). The Arahant Project Teaser. YouTube. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2POKoPJRjvM. [Accessed on 16.09.2017].

Klerkx, L., Aarts, N., & Leeuwis, C. (2010). Adaptive management in agricultural innovation systems: The interactions between innovation networks and their environment. Agricultural Systems, 103(6), 390–400.

Kreutzmann, H. (2008). Kashmir and the Northern Areas of Pakistan: Boundary-making along Contested Borders. Erdkunde, 62(3), 201–219.

Kochar, A. (2005). Can Targeted Food Programs Improve Nutrition? An Empirical Analysis of India’s Public Distribution System. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 54(1), 203–235. 

Kwa, A. (2001). Agriculture in Development Countries: Which Way Forward? Trade-Related Agenda, Development and Equity. Occasional Papers. Available from: http://focusweb.org/publications/2001/agriculture_which_way_forward.html. [Accessed on: 03.09.2016].

Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council (LAHDC). (2016). Available from: http://leh.nic.in/. [Accessed on 30.05.2016]. [Accessed on: 03.09.2016]. 

LAHDC-Leh (Ladakh Autonomous Hill Development Council – _Leh). (2011). District Profile. Available from: http://leh.gov.in/pages/leh.pdf. [Accessed on: 03.09.2016].  

LAHDC-Leh. (2012). Statistical Handbook. Available from: http://leh.gov.in/pages/handbook.pdf. [Accessed on: 03.09.2016]. 

LAHDC-Leh DCO (Deputy Commissioner Office). (2011). Disaster Management, Available from: http://www.leh.nic.in/Disester%20Management%20Leh.pdf. [Accessed on: 03.09.2016]. 

Ladakh Ecological Development Group (LEDeG). (2016). Available from: http://www.ledeg.org/. [Accessed on 30.05.2016].

Lavison, R. (2013). Factors Influencing the Adoption of Organic Fertilizers in Vegetable Production in Accra, Msc Thesis, Accra Ghana.

Leh Nutrition Project (LNP). (2016). Available from: http://www.reachladakh.com. [Accessed on 30.06.2016].

Marshall, Catherine & Rossman, Gretchen B. (1989). Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Mauceri, M., Alwang, J., Norton, G. Barrera, V. (2005). Adoption of Integrated Pest Management Technologies: A Case Study of Potato Farmers in Carchi, Ecuador; Selected Paper prepared for presentation at the American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting, Providence, Rhode Island, July 24-27, 2005.

Michaud, J. (1996). A historical account of modern social change in Ladakh (Indian Kashmir) with special attention paid to tourism. International Journal of Comparative Sociology 37:286–301.

Mignouna, B., Manyong, M., Rusike, J., Mutabazi, S., & Senkondo, M. (2011). Determinants of Adopting Imazapyr-Resistant Maize Technology and its Impact on Household Income in Western Kenya: AgBioforum, 14(3), 158-163. Hall, B. and Khan, B. (2002) Adoption of new technology. New Economy Handbook.

Mortreux, C., and Barnet, J. (2009). Climate Change, Migration and Adaptation in Funafuti, Tuvalu. Global Environmental Change, 19.

Mountain Institute, (2016). Community Livelihood and Enterprise Development. Available from: http://www.mountain.org/. [Accessed 03.09.2016].

Mwangi, M., and Kariuki, S. (2015). Factors Determining Adoption of New Agricultural Technology by Smallholder Farmers in Developing Countries. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 6(5), 208–217.

Namgail, T., Bhatnagar, Y. V., Mishra, C., & Bagchi, S. (2007). Pastoral nomads of the Indian changthang: Production system, landuse and socioeconomic changes. Human Ecology, 35(4), 497–504.  

News Foresight. (2013). Sustainable Intensification at Scale: A Framework for Strategy Design. Available from: http://www.newforesight.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Sustainable-Intensification-Model_here.pdf  [Accessed on: 03.09.2016].

Norberg-Hodge, H. (2000). Ancient Futures: Learning from Ladakh. London: Sierra Club Books.

Nüsser, M., and Clemens, J. (1996). Impacts on Mixed Mountain Agriculture in the Rupal Valley, Nanga Parbat, Northern Pakistan. Mountain Research and Development, 16(2), 117–133.

Owen, L. A., Caffee, M. W., Bovard, K.R., Finkel, R. C., and Sharma, M. C. (2006). Terrestrial comogenic nuclide surface exposure dating of the oldest glacial successions in the Himalayan orogen: Ladakh range, northern India. The Geological Society of America. 118: 383-392.

Pannell, D. J., Marshall, G. R., Barr, N., Curtis, A., Vanclay, F., & Wilkinson, R. (2006). Understanding and promoting adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 46(11), 1407–1424. 

Planning Commission. (2002). Tenth Five Year Plan. Delhi: Controller of Publication, Government of India.

Prager, K. and Posthumus, H. (2010). Socio-Economic Factors Influencing Famers’ Adoption of Soil Conservation Practices in Europe. Human Dimensions of Soil and Water Conservation. 12. p. 12.

Pretty, J and Smith, D (2004). Social capital in Biodiversity Conservation and Management. Conservation Biology. 18(3), 613-638.

Reardon, T., Stamoulis, K. and Pingali, P. (2007). Rural Non-farm Emplyment in Developing Countries in an er of Globalization. Agricultural Economics 37:173–183.

Rehman, T., McKemey, K., Yates, C. M., Cooke, R. J., Garforth, C., Tranter, R. b., Dorward, P. T. (2007). Identifying and understanding factors influencing the uptake of new technologies on dairy farms in SW England using the theory of reasoned action. Agricultural Systems, 94(2), 281–293.

Rizvi, J. (1999). Trans-Himalayan Caravans: Merchant Princes and Peasant Traders in Ladakh. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations, 5th Edition. 

Rossman, G.B., and Rallis, S.F. (2003). Leaqrning in the Field: An Introduction to Qualitative Research. (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. pp. 31-60.

Sherratt, K. (undated). Social and economic characteristics of Ladakh. Geology got Global Development.

Sinclair, J., and Ham, L. (2000). Household Adaptive Strategies: Shaping Livelihood Security in the Western Himalaya. Canadian Journal of Development Studies, 21(1), 89–112.

Skeldon, R. (1985). Population pressure, mobility, and socioeconomic change in mountainous environments: Regions of refuge in comparative perspective. Mountain Research and Development 5, 233–250.

Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinhart & Winston.

Sorensen, C (2000), Social capital and rural development: a discussion of issues. World Bank, Social Development Family, Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Development Network, Washington, DC.

Stone, G. D. (2016). "Towards a General Theory of Agricultural Knowledge Production: Environmental, Social, and Didactic Learning." Culture, Agriculture, Food and Environment 38 (1): 5--17.

Thayyen, J. R., Dimri, A. P., Kumar, P., and Agnihotri. 2012. Study of a cloudburst and flash flood around Leh, India during August 4-6, 2010. Natural hazards. 64: 2175-2204.

Trienekens, JH. (2011). Agricultural value chains in developing countries a framework for analysis. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review/ 14(2), 51-82.

Tripp, Robert. (2006). Self-Sufficient Agriculture: Labour and Knowledge in Small-Scale Farming. Sterling: Routledge.

Uaiene, R., Arndt, C., Masters, W. (2009) Determinants of Agricultural Technology Adoption in Mozambique.Discussion papers No. 67E.

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 4th Edition. London. Sage Publications, Inc.

Waller, B., Hoy, W., Henderson, L., Stinner, B., Welty, C. (1998). Matching innovation with potential users: A case study of potato IPM practices. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 70: 203-215

Woolcock, M., and Sweetser, A.T. (2007). Social capital: the bonds that connect. Asian Development Bank (ADB), Manila.

World Bank. (2001). Year in review. Washington, DC: World Bank. 1: 1-154. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/624991468764410016/Year-in-review. [Accessed on 30.05.2016].

World Bank. (2001). World Development Report 2000/2001: Attacking Poverty. World Development Report. New York: Oxford University Press.  World Bank. Available from: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/11856 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.  [Accessed on 30.05.2016].