Evaluating Farmer Acceptance of the  Farmers’ Intervention Monitoring Card (FIMC): Key Determinants of Use and Adoption

Authors

  • Benjamin Y. Burgess Jr. Isabela State University image/svg+xml Author
  • Dr. Ma. Rita A. Reario Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.64358/jstgc.v2i1.10

Keywords:

Farmers’ Intervention Monitoring Card (FIMC), Technology acceptance, perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, willingness to use

Abstract

Abstract

This quantitative study examined farmers’ acceptance of the Farmers’ Intervention Monitoring Card (FIMC) as a digital support modality in the upland rice-farming communities of Ifugao, Philippines. Specifically, it assessed the level of acceptance in terms of perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness, and willingness to use. Using a validated 90-item Likert-type questionnaire adapted from Blair (2022), data were gathered from 380 registered RSBSA rice farmers, Municipal Agriculture Officers, and Agricultural Extension Workers selected through purposive sampling in five municipalities with the highest number of FIMC beneficiaries. Descriptive statistics such as frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation were used to analyze the data. Results revealed a generally high level of acceptance of the FIMC. Farmers agreed that the system is accessible, manageable, and user-friendly, as reflected in the grand mean of 3.81 for perceived ease of use, despite some challenges related to cash withdrawal and access to inputs due to infrastructure and logistical constraints. Perceived usefulness obtained a higher grand mean of 3.94, indicating that farmers view the FIMC as an effective tool for improving access to financial assistance and agricultural inputs, enhancing farm planning, and contributing to productivity and household income. Willingness to use registered the highest grand mean of 4.22, showing strong intent to continuously adopt and recommend the system, especially when it leads to increased farm profitability. Overall, the FIMC demonstrates strong user acceptance and promising potential for strengthening digital agricultural support, provided that connectivity, training and implementation gaps are continually addressed.

References

Aker, J. C., Boumnijel, R., McClelland, A., & Tierney, N. (2020). Payment mechanisms and antipoverty programs: Evidence from a mobile money cash transfer experiment in Niger. The Economic Journal, 130(627), 2037–2056.

Aquino, R., Dizon, M., & Fernandez, C. (2021). Impact of the Philippine Journal of Agricultural Research, 42(3), 55–67. on input tracking and farm productivity in the Philippines.

Cruz, J. L., & Rivera, M. A. (2022). Bridging the digital divide in Philippine agriculture: Access and barriers to digital farming tools. Journal of Rural Development Studies, 17(1), 23–36.

Memorandum Circular No. 50, Series of 2023: Guidelines on the implementation of the Quezon City, Philippines. of Agriculture. (2023).

Memorandum Order No. 17, Series of 2023: Implementation of fuel subsidy distribution using FIMC. Quezon City, Philippines. Department of Agriculture. (2023).

Memorandum Order No. 27, Series of 2024: RSBSA Data Privacy Manual. Quezon City, Philippines. Department of Agriculture. (2024).

Food and Agriculture Organization. (2022). Digital tools and monitoring systems in Southeast Asian agriculture. FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific.

Garcia, F. A., & Reyes, L. B. (2022). Infrastructure and digital readiness of farming communities in Central Luzon. Philippine Journal of Information and Development, 10(2), 45–58.

Gupta, R., & Kumar, S. (2021). Digital subsidy cards and crop yield improvements: Evidence from northern India. Journal of Agricultural Innovation, 5(1), 15–28.

Lopez, M. C., & Reyes, V. D. (2021). Trust and transparency in government agricultural programs: A farmer’s perspective. Rural Governance Review, 3(2), 101–116.

Mendoza, J. L., & Borja, T. M. (2022). Environmental impacts of digital agriculture tools in the Philippines. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 12(4), 87–99.

Mendoza, J. L., & Santos, E. M. (2023). Barriers to FIMC program registration among rural farmers. Philippine Journal of Public Administration, 65(1), 38–54.

Nguyen, L., & Tran, H. T. (2023). Digital monitoring tools and farm productivity in Vietnam: Evidence from the Mekong Delta. Asian Agricultural Studies, 14(2), 33–49.

Santos, M. E., & Dela Cruz, R. P. (2022). Implementation challenges of the Policy and Development Review, 8(1), 60–73. program.

Solis, A. D., & Garcia, N. P. (2022). Enhancing sustainable farming practices through digital resource tracking. Environmental Agriculture Journal, 9(3), 112–124.

Torres, A. J., Manalo, R. G., & Villanueva, L. M. (2020). Digital literacy in Philippine agriculture: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Educational Technology and Development, 4(1), 78–89.

United Nations Development Programme. (2022). Enhancing aid delivery through digital ID systems: Lessons from Asia. UNDP Regional Bureau for Asia and the Pacific.

World Bank. (2021). Harnessing digital technologies for agriculture in developing countries. World Bank Publications.

World Bank. (2022). Digital cash transfers and rural resilience: Global insights. World Bank Group

Aker, J. C., Mbiti, I. M., & O'Connell, J. F. (2020). The impact of mobile money on the rural economy of Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Development Economics, 142, 102431.

Asian Development Bank. (2022). Seed distribution programs in Southeast Asia: Flexible allocation strategies for sustainable agriculture. Asian Development Bank.

Becker, K., & Fischer, R. (2024). Precision agriculture and intervention monitoring cards: Optimizing input management in European farms. Journal of Agricultural Engineering, 5(2), 112-128.

Briones, R., Santos, M., & Reyes, L. (2024). Organic fertilizer adoption and policy reforms in the Philippines. Philippine Journal of Agricultural Development, 56(1), 45–67.

BusinessWorld Online. (2023). https://www.bworldonline.com Department of Agriculture launches digital procurement system to streamline agricultural input distribution.

Carreon, J., Villanueva, P., & Dela Cruz, A. (2022). Digital literacy and technology adoption among rural farmers in the Philippines. Asian Journal of Rural Development, 9(3), 120–135.

Chand, R., et al. (2022). Impact of delayed delivery of agricultural subsidies on smallholder farmers in developing economies. Journal of Agricultural Development, 45(2), 123–137.

Dela Cruz, J. (2024). The role of local officials in refining beneficiary lists for agricultural assistance programs. Journal of Philippine Public Administration, 68(1), 89-105.

Conservation and biodiversity report. DA-CAR. Department of Agriculture–Cordillera Administrative Region (DA-CAR). (2023). Heirloom rice landraces in the Cordillera region.

Francisco, M., Tan, R., & Lopez, E. (2024). Digital agriculture adoption and challenges in marginalized farming communities. Journal of Philippine Agricultural Studies, 12(2), 99–115.

Gandhi, V., & Kaur, S. (2021). Integration of mobile technology in government agricultural databases for precision subsidy targeting. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 91(4), 589–601.

Garcia, M., et al. (2022). Digital infrastructure and agricultural productivity in rural areas: Challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Rural Development, 39(4), 451–468.

Gupta, S., & Kumar, R. (2021). Digital intervention cards and their impact on farm input management: A case study of smallholder farmers in rural India. Journal of Agri-Tech Innovations, 18(2), 121–135.

Gupta, S., & Roy, D. (2019). Electronic subsidy delivery systems and farmer access to government subsidies in India. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 70(4), 987–1004.

Ituriaga, E., et al. (2024). User-centric designs for digital financial support in agriculture: Improving accessibility and satisfaction. Journal of Digital Agriculture, 7(1), 67–84.

Ituriaga, J., Santos, M., & Reyes, P. (2024). Government service quality and farmer trust: Insights from agricultural support programs in the Philippines. Journal of Agricultural Policy and Development, 15(1), 45-62.

Javier, L., & Alvarado, S. (2021). Technological infrastructure and farmer accessibility in rural Southeast Asia. Southeast Asian Journal of Agricultural Technology, 18(4), 210–225.

Johnson, A., & Petel, M. (2023). Digital tools for rural financial inclusion: A study of farmers' financial literacy and decision-making. Journal of Rural Finance, 5(3), 88–104.

Kasim, R., et al. (2020). The role of intervention monitoring cards in improving farm productivity and income in rural Ghana. Journal of Agricultural Development, 32(1), 15-30.

Khan, A., et al. (2023). Bureaucratic inefficiencies and inter-agency coordination in South Asian agricultural support programs. South Asian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 51(3), 299–315.

Kojin, T., Nguyen, H., & Tran, P. (2022). Fertilizer quality issues and nutrient specification mismatches in Vietnam. Vietnamese Journal of Agricultural Science, 45(6), 337–350.

Langngag, L. (2021). Effects of vermicompost levels on heirloom rice cultivars in Kalinga. Journal of Organic Agriculture, 14(1), 58–73.

Lee, S., et al. (2023). Comparative study on farmers’ opinions of digital assistance programs in Southeast Asia. Journal of Agricultural Policy, 18(1), 45-60.

Malik, A., Garcia, F., & Santos, J. (2020). Timing and satisfaction of fertilizer distribution among smallholder farmers. International Journal of Agricultural Extension, 28(3), 215–230.

Martinez, L., & Walker, P. (2022). Practical challenges and benefits of digital farmer assistance systems. Journal of Rural Studies, 88, 1-15.

Masangu, K., & Mchomvu, L. (2020). The role of mobile technology in promoting sustainable agriculture in Tanzania. Journal of Agricultural Development, 25(4), 312–328.

Mesfin, T., et al. (2024). Barriers to data quality in public sector digital systems: Lessons from rural implementations. Government Information Quarterly, 41(1), 101576.

Micabalo, R., Delos Reyes, F., & Bautista, L. (2024). Challenges and opportunities in financial assistance for commercial farmers: A Philippine case study. Philippine Journal of Rural Development, 28(2), 120-139.

Miller, R., et al. (2022). The impact of digital monitoring tools on water usage and sustainability in large-scale farms. Environmental Management Journal, 35(4), 210-225.

Moyo, N., & Zungu, S. (2022). The role of intervention monitoring cards in improving farm yields and water conservation in Sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Agricultural Technology, 30(2), 85–100.

Mulugeta, T., et al. (2021). The role of digital monitoring tools in knowledge sharing and decision-making among farmers. Journal of Rural Studies, 42, 112-125.

Nguyen, T., & Tran, A. (2023). Mobile-based intervention monitoring systems and their impact on pest and resource management in Southeast Asia. Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, 15(1), 32-45.

Pagador, A., et al. (2023). Effects of tailored seed quantities on farmer satisfaction and program participation in government agricultural assistance initiatives. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 58(3), 412–429.

Patel, S., & Gupta, A. (2021). Data privacy and security concerns in the adoption of digital agricultural technologies. Journal of Public Policy and Administration, 44(2), 150-165.

Peasant Movement of the Philippines. (2023). Scrutiny of government agricultural programs: The case of the Rice Competitiveness Enhancement Fund. https://peasantmovement.org/reports/rcef-2023

Perez, L., & Garcia, M. (2023). The role of feedback loops in digital agricultural monitoring systems. Journal of Agricultural Science, 12(3), 56-71.

Philippine Information Agency. (2024). Farmers in Surigao City receive ₱5,000 aid through FIMC system. https://www.pia.gov.ph/news/articles/2024/09/10/farmers-surigao-aid-fimc

Philippine Information Agency. (2024). Farmers receive cash aid through Fertilizer Intervention Monitoring Card. https://pia.gov.ph/news/articles/2024/05/01/farmers-receive-cash-aid

Philippine Institute for Development Studies. (2023). Digital divide and rural agriculture: Challenges and opportunities. PIDS Policy Notes, No. 2023-07. https://pids.gov.ph/pubs/policy_notes

Philippine Institute for Development Studies. (2024). Infrastructure challenges in agricultural input distribution. PIDS Research Report. https://pids.gov.ph/research/infrastructure-agriculture

Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice). (2021). Seed assistance programs and farmer satisfaction: A study of impact and equity. PhilRice.

Presidential Communications Office. (2024). Empowering farmers through financial independence and timely assistance. https://pco.gov.ph/news/2024/03/15/empowering-farmers

Presidential Communications Office. (2024). FIMC empowers farmers with financial independence. https://pco.gov.ph/news/fimc-empowers-farmers

Puspaningrum, D., Wibowo, R., & Sari, N. (2022). Enhancing transparency in subsidized fertilizer distribution: Lessons from Indonesia’s SIMETRI system. Journal of Agricultural Policy and Governance, 7(2), 89–105.

Puspaningrum, D., Wibowo, R., & Sari, N. (2023). Digital infrastructure and farmer participation in agricultural programs. Southeast Asian Technology Review, 5(1), 35–50.

Pusparani, I., et al. (2023). Learnability, understandability, and operability in digital financial applications: Factors influencing user satisfaction. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 39(5), 450–465.

Robert, B., et al. (2022). Digital literacy and the adoption of mobile money systems among elderly farmers in rural communities. Journal of Rural Studies, 55, 120-135.

Saputra, H., et al. (2021). Usability issues in digital financial platforms: The role of interface design and user guidance. Journal of Usability Studies, 16(2), 87–99.

Sharma, S., et al. (2021). Barriers to technology adoption in Indian agriculture. Journal of Agricultural and Rural Development, 45(1), 22-35.

Smith, J., & Lee, S. (2021). Cash cards in Southeast Asia: A study of digital literacy and infrastructure challenges. Journal of Agricultural Technology, 29(4), 210-225.

Sultan, F., & Stremitzer, A. (2020). Mobile-based agricultural interventions in Southeast Asia. Journal of Development Economics, 142, 102431.

Tadesse, A., et al. (2019). Cultural and contextual factors influencing the adoption of digital agricultural systems in rural Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural Extension, 19(2), 88-102.

Tan, J., et al. (2022). Unfamiliarity with mobile apps and its effect on technology adoption among farmers in Southeast Asia. Journal of Agricultural Technology, 30(1), 45-60.

Tourangeau, R., & Yan, T. (2007). Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychological Bulletin, 133(5), 859–883. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.5.859

Wanjiru, M., et al. (2022). Scalability and sustainability of digital agricultural interventions: A literature review. Journal of Agricultural Policy, 17(3), 121–135.

Wang, L., & Liu, P. (2022). The use of Cash-Card-ID systems in modernizing agricultural assistance in China. Journal of Rural Policy, 39(1), 1-15.

World Bank. (2021). Digital financial services and agricultural productivity. World Bank Publications.

World Bank. (2022). Digital cash transfers for agricultural support: A global analysis. World Bank Publications.

Zhao, F., & Wang, Q. (2021). Digital monitoring platforms in disaster risk management for agriculture: A case study of China. Technology and Society, 62, 101310.

Zhou, Y., et al. (2021). Data entry practices and accountability in government digital programs: Impacts on service delivery. Public Administration Review, 81(4), 620–633.

Downloads

Published

2026-03-20

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 1 (2026): Journal of Social Transformation, Governance and Cultural Studies

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Social Transformation, Governance and Cultural Studies

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Under this license, you may not use the material for any commercial purposes.

The images or other third-party material in this article are included under the Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material.