Feeding nearly 10 billion people by 2050 demands a radical transformation in agriculture. With global food needs projected to surge by 70%, the pressure on our food systems is immense, compounded by agriculture’s significant environmental footprint – responsible for roughly 40% of global land use and major contributions to habitat loss, pollution, and climate change.
Precision Agriculture Technologies (PATs) – encompassing tools like GPS-guided tractors, drones, soil sensors, yield monitors, and data analytics software – offer a beacon of hope.
By enabling farmers to apply water, fertilizer, pesticides, and seeds with pinpoint accuracy, PATs promise greater efficiency, higher yields, reduced environmental harm, and improved profitability. It’s a potential win-win for food security and sustainability.
However, a critical disconnect exists. In the United States, over 88% of farms are classified as small-scale (grossing less than $250,000 annually). Kentucky exemplifies this, boasting 69,425 farms with an average size of just 179 acres (significantly below the national average of 463 acres).
Crucially, 63% of Kentucky farms have annual sales under $10,000, and 97% are smaller than 1,000 acres. Despite numerous initiatives promoting PATs, adoption among these vital small-scale operations remains stubbornly low.
Why? A comprehensive study by researchers at Kentucky State University, involving 98 small-scale Kentucky farmers, employed rigorous methods to uncover the precise factors influencing PAT adoption, yielding actionable insights backed by concrete data.
Small Farm Landscape and Precision Agriculture Adoption Rate
A detailed study by Kentucky State University researchers set out to uncover the real reasons behind low PAT use. They surveyed 98 small-scale Kentucky farmers using a mix of methods: mailed questionnaires, in-person talks, and group discussions.
This thorough approach revealed a clear picture of the adoption problem. First, the findings showed that only 24% of these farmers used any PATs. That means a significant 76% had not adopted these technologies.
Among those who did adopt, basic GPS guidance for tractors was the most common tool. The study actually listed 17 different PATs available, including yield monitors, soil mapping, drones, and satellite imagery, but use beyond basic GPS was rare.
Understanding the farmers themselves is important. The average age of those surveyed was 62 years, older than the national farmer average of 57.5 years.
Most were male (70%) and surprisingly well-educated, with 77% having college degrees or higher. Their farms averaged 137.6 acres, and they had been farming for about 27 years on average.
Regarding income, 58% reported household earnings between $50,000 and $99,999. This background helps explain the adoption patterns uncovered by the researchers’ statistical analysis.
Key Drivers of Precision Agriculture Adoption
The researchers used a powerful statistical method called binary logistic regression. This technique is excellent for figuring out which factors most influence a yes-or-no decision – like adopting PATs or not.
Their model proved very reliable. It identified three factors that significantly impacted whether a small farmer used PATs:
1. Farm Size (Acres Owned/Managed)
This was a strong positive driver. Simply put, larger farms were more likely to use PATs. For example, 54% of farmers with over 100 acres adopted PATs, compared to only 28% of non-adopters who had farms that size.
Tellingly, none of the adopters had farms between 21-50 acres, a size where 19% of non-adopters operated. Statistically, the model showed that for every single additional acre of farm size, the odds of adopting PATs increased by 3% (Odds Ratio = 1.03).
This makes sense because larger farms can spread the high upfront cost of PATs over more land, making the investment more worthwhile.
2. Farmer’s Age
Age was a major negative factor, highly significant in the model. Younger farmers were much more likely to adopt. While 42% of farmers aged 25-50 used PATs, only 12% of those aged 50 or above did (conversely, 88% of farmers 50+ were non-adopters).
The statistics were striking: each additional year of age decreased the odds of adopting PATs by 8% (Odds Ratio = 0.93).
Older farmers might find the technology intimidating, doubt its benefits for their situation, or feel they have less time to recoup the investment costs.
3. Years of Farming Experience
Interestingly, more experience actually increased the likelihood of adoption, despite the negative effect of age. Farmers deeply rooted in agriculture saw the potential value.
Half (50%) of those with over 30 years of experience adopted PATs, compared to just 26% of non-adopters with that much experience. Each extra year of farming experience boosted the odds of adoption by 4% (Odds Ratio = 1.04).
This suggests that deep practical knowledge helps farmers recognize inefficiencies that PATs could solve and appreciate the long-term benefits.
Surprising Non-Drivers For Precision Technologies Adoption
Interestingly, the study also found that several factors often assumed to drive adoption did not have a statistically significant impact in this specific context:
1. Gender: While 79% of adopters were male versus 72% of non-adopters, this difference wasn’t big enough in the statistical model to be considered a primary driver. Gender wasn’t a key deciding factor here.
2. Household Income: Income levels didn’t significantly predict adoption. Though 42% of adopters earned over $99,999 compared to 24% of non-adopters, and fewer adopters (13%) were in the lowest income bracket (<$50,000) than non-adopters (18%), income itself wasn’t a major force in the model.
3. Education Level: Education also lacked significance. While a higher percentage of adopters (88%) had college degrees or more compared to non-adopters (77%), this difference didn’t translate to a strong statistical effect on the adoption decision.
4. Related Expertise: Having skills in areas like agronomy or machinery wasn’t a significant independent driver either, even though 54% of adopters reported such expertise versus only 27% of non-adopters.
Beyond the statistics, the farmers themselves clearly voiced the hurdles they face:
1. Overwhelming Cost: Nearly 20% identified high cost as the top barrier. One farmer summed it up: “Funds are limited. Technology is great if it is affordable for all.” The price of hardware (drones, sensors) and software is simply too steep for small operations.
2. Complexity: Roughly 15% found PATs “too complex.” Farmers worried about difficult interfaces, steep learning curves, and the time needed to master new systems. They need tools that are easy to use and fit smoothly into their work.
3. Uncertain Profitability: About 12% doubted the return on investment (“Not profitable”). Small, diverse farms struggle to see how PAT benefits proven on large corn and soybean fields apply to their mix of vegetables, livestock, or orchards. One farmer explained their limited PAT use was confined to a high tunnel garden due to the small, varied plots.
4. Time Constraints: Around 10% felt PATs were “too time-consuming.” Learning new tech, managing data, and maintaining equipment adds hours they don’t have.
5. Trust Gap: Concerns about uncertain benefits (~10%) and lack of confidence (~10%) highlight that farmers need solid proof PATs will work on their specific farm before investing precious time and money. Privacy/data security worries were also noted by about 10%.
6. Other Issues: The fast pace of tech change (~10%), geographic issues like poor internet (<5%), general mistrust (<5%), and risk perception (<5%) were less common but still present barriers.
Practical Solutions for Increasing PAT Adoption Rate
The study’s clear findings point directly toward actions that can make a real difference in increasing PAT adoption among Kentucky’s small farms.
Target Younger Farmers & Reduce Costs
First and foremost, policies must specifically target younger farmers while aggressively addressing the cost barrier.
Since the research shows each additional year of age decreases adoption odds by 8%, programs should focus on farmers under 50 through start-up grants, substantial cost-share programs covering 50-75% of PAT expenses, and low-interest long-term loans tailored for technology investment.
This proactive approach helps overcome the natural resistance seen in older demographics while supporting the incoming generation of farmers.
Develop Truly Small-Farm PAT Solutions
Equally important is developing technology that actually fits small farm realities. Currently, most PATs are designed for large operations, putting small farms at a disadvantage.
Industry and researchers must prioritize developing affordable solutions specifically for farms under 200 acres. This means creating low-cost sensors, simple subscription-based software without large upfront fees, and modular systems that allow farmers to start small and expand later.
Multi-purpose tools that work across diverse small farm operations – from vegetable plots to orchards to livestock – are essential rather than systems only suited for large row crop operations.
The cost barrier, identified by 20% of farmers as their primary obstacle, demands particularly creative solutions. Beyond traditional cost-share programs, we should look to successful models from Europe where small farmers pool resources through cooperatives to jointly purchase or lease expensive equipment.
Establishing similar farmer-led equipment pools in Kentucky could make technologies like drones or advanced soil mapping services accessible to those who couldn’t afford them individually.
Universities and Extension services play a crucial role here by generating and widely sharing concrete, localized data showing exactly how specific PATs save money or increase profits on small, diverse Kentucky farms – this hard evidence helps farmers justify the investment.
Revolutionize Training and Support
Training and support systems need complete transformation to overcome complexity and confidence barriers. Current classroom-based approaches often miss the mark. Instead,
Extension should prioritize on-farm demonstrations using actual small, diverse operations as living classrooms. Building peer-to-peer networks where experienced PAT users mentor newcomers can be particularly effective, as farmers often trust fellow producers more than outside experts.
Training must become intensely practical – think hands-on sessions like “Using a Soil Moisture Sensor” or “Setting Up Auto-Steer on Small Tractors” rather than theoretical lectures.
Just as crucial is providing ongoing, easily accessible local support through hotlines and farm visits, as relying on YouTube videos or online forums leaves many farmers stranded when problems arise.
Foster Strong Collaboration
Ultimately, success will require unprecedented collaboration across the entire agricultural ecosystem. Government agencies, universities, Extension services, technology companies, lenders, and farmer organizations must break out of their silos and work together strategically.
This means co-developing appropriate technologies, co-delivering training programs, creating innovative financing packages, and establishing clear standards for data privacy and security that farmers can trust.
Only through this kind of coordinated, multi-stakeholder effort can we overcome the complex web of barriers identified in the research and truly bring the benefits of precision agriculture to Kentucky’s small farm operations.
Conclusion
The Kentucky State University study delivers a powerful, data-driven snapshot of the PAT adoption challenge. It conclusively shows that farm size, farmer age, and years of experience are the dominant forces shaping adoption decisions for small-scale operations, while gender, income, and education play surprisingly minor roles.
The reality is stark: only 24% adoption among the vast majority of Kentucky farms. The barriers are loud and clear: high cost (20%), complexity (15%), and uncertain profits (12%), amplified by small-scale economics and an aging farmer population.
Ignoring these small farms isn’t an option. Getting PATs into their hands is essential for growing more food sustainably. Success depends on targeted policies that support younger farmers and slash costs, innovative technology built for small-acreage reality, and a complete overhaul of training and support towards practical, local, hands-on help delivered through strong partnerships.
Reference: Pandeya, S., Gyawali, B. R., & Upadhaya, S. (2025). Factors influencing precision agriculture technology adoption among small-scale farmers in Kentucky and their implications for policy and practice. Agriculture, 15(2), 177. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15020177
Precision Farming
