Advertisement

Adoption of Pro-poor Innovations in the Context of the Base of the Pyramid and Subsistence Marketplaces: Challenges, Opportunities and Research Agenda

  • Ben Lowe
  • Md. Rajibul Hasan
Chapter
Part of the Advances in Theory and Practice of Emerging Markets book series (ATPEM)

Abstract

In countries such as Bangladesh, some innovations have diffused rapidly and been taken up by large segments of the population (e.g. mobile phones). However, some innovations which offer the promise of time saving, greater efficiency and better economy have been slower in their take-up (e.g. gas stoves). What explains these contrasting examples? The study of consumer innovation adoption is vast. However, the majority of research in this area has been written about economically developed economies where consumers have excess disposable income to spend on the latest gadgets. Yet, innovations benefit economically less wealthy consumers too (e.g. mobile banking, information communication technologies, etc.). Such innovations have been termed pro-poor innovations by some (Ramani, SadreGhazi, & Duysters, Technological Forecasting and Social Change 79(4):676–687, 2012) and are innovations which offer some developmental benefit within the so-called Base of the Pyramid markets. The literature in this area is fragmented and scattered across numerous disciplines such as business, health, development, economics and others. Given this, researchers interested in this area have great opportunities to expand our knowledge base and contribute to an area of societal importance. This chapter reviews literature in this area, presents some challenges (opportunities!) for doing research in this context and provides a future research agenda.

Keywords

Adoption Consumer Base of the Pyramid Pro-poor innovations Subsistence marketplaces 

References

  1. Ajzen, I. (1991). Theories of cognitive self-regulation the theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.Google Scholar
  2. Alalwan, A. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Rana, N. P. (2017). Factors influencing adoption of mobile banking by Jordanian bank customers: Extending UTAUT2 with trust. International Journal of Information Management, 37(3), 99–110.Google Scholar
  3. Alalwan, A. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., Lal, B., & Williams, M. D. (2015). Consumer adoption of internet banking in Jordan: Examining the role of hedonic motivation, habit, self-efficacy and trust. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 20(2), 145–157.Google Scholar
  4. Alalwan, A. A., Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., & Simintiras, A. C. (2016). Jordanian consumers’ adoption of telebanking: Influence of perceived usefulness, trust and self-efficacy. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 34(5), 690–709.Google Scholar
  5. Arts, J. W., Frambach, R. T., & Bijmolt, T. H. (2011). Generalizations on consumer innovation adoption: A meta-analysis on drivers of intention and behavior. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 28(2), 134–144.Google Scholar
  6. Ashraf, N., Berry, J., & Shapiro, J. M. (2010). Can higher prices stimulate product use? Evidence from a field experiment in Zambia. The American Economic Review, 100(5), 2383–2413.Google Scholar
  7. Blumberg, B. F., Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2014). Business research methods. New York, NY: McGraw-hill education.Google Scholar
  8. Brislin R.W. (1980). Cross-Cultural Research Methods. In: Altman I., Rapoport A., Wohlwill J.F. (eds) Environment and Culture. Human Behavior and Environment (Advances in Theory and Research), vol 4. Springer, Boston, MA.Google Scholar
  9. Chau, P. Y. K., & Hu, P. J.-H. (2001). Information technology acceptance by individual professionals: A model comparison approach. Decision Sciences, 32(4), 699–719.Google Scholar
  10. Danneels, E., & Kleinschmidtb, E. J. (2001). Product innovativeness from the firm’s perspective: Its dimensions and their relation with project selection and performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18(6), 357–373.Google Scholar
  11. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340.Google Scholar
  12. Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.Google Scholar
  13. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). The sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 695–728). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Donner, J. (2008). Research approaches to mobile use in the developing world: A review of the literature. The Information Society, 24(3), 140–159.Google Scholar
  15. Dwivedi, Y. K., Khan, N., & Papazafeiropoulou, A. (2007). Consumer adoption and usage of broadband in Bangladesh. Electronic Government, an International Journal, 4(3), 299–313.Google Scholar
  16. Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., Janssen, M., Lal, B., Williams, M. D., & Clement, R. M. (2017). An empirical validation of a unified model of electronic government adoption (UMEGA). Government Information Quarterly. 34(2), 211–230. Available at http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740624X1730103X.
  17. Dwivedi, Y. K., Rana, N. P., Jeyaraj, A., Clement, M., & Williams, M. D. (2017). Re-examining the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): Towards a revised theoretical model. Information Systems Frontiers. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-017-9774-y.
  18. Farrington-Darby, T., & Wilson, J. R. (2009). Understanding social interactions in complex work: A video ethnography. Cognition, Technology & Work, 11(1), 1–15.Google Scholar
  19. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison- Wesley.Google Scholar
  20. Hart, S., & Prahalad, C. K. (2002). The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid. Strategy+ Business, 26, 54–67.Google Scholar
  21. Hasan, M. R., Lowe, B., & Rahman, M. (2017). Visual cues and innovation adoption among bottom of the pyramid consumers. Qualitative Market Research, 20(2), 147–157.Google Scholar
  22. Jebarajakirthy, C., & Lobo, A. (2015). A study investigating attitudinal perceptions of microcredit services andtheir relevant drivers in bottom of pyramid market segments, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 23(March), 39–48.Google Scholar
  23. Kanagawa, M., & Nakata, T. (2007). Analysis of the energy access improvement and its socio-economic impacts in rural areas of developing countries. Ecological Economics, 62(2), 319–329.Google Scholar
  24. Kim, H. W., Chan, H. C., & Gupta, S. (2007). Value-based adoption of mobile internet: An empirical investigation. Decision Support Systems, 43(1), 111–126.Google Scholar
  25. Kulviwat, S., Bruner Burner, G. C., II, Nasco, S. A., & Clark, T. (2007). Toward a unified theory of consumer acceptance. Psychology and Marketing, 24(12), 1059–1084.Google Scholar
  26. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry (Vol. 75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  27. Lowe, B., & Alpert, F. (2015). Forecasting consumer perception of innovativeness. Technovation, 45, 1–14.Google Scholar
  28. Mathieson, K. (1991). Predicting user intentions: Comparing the technology acceptance model with the theory of planned behavior. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 173–191.Google Scholar
  29. Mendoza, R. U., & Thelen, N. (2008). Innovations to make markets more inclusive for the poor. Development Policy Review, 26(4), 427–458.Google Scholar
  30. Miller, G., & Mobarak, A. M. (2014). Learning about new technologies through social networks: Experimental evidence on nontraditional stoves in Bangladesh. Marketing Science, 34(4), 480–499.Google Scholar
  31. Maneesriwongul, W. and Dixon, J.K. (2004). Instrument translation process: a methods review, Journal of Advanced Nursing, 48(2), 175–186.Google Scholar
  32. Nakata, C., & Weidner, K. (2012). Enhancing new product adoption at the base of the pyramid: A contextualized model. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29(1), 21–32.Google Scholar
  33. Panwar, N. L., Kurchania, A. K., & Rathore, N. S. (2009). Mitigation of greenhouse gases by adoption of improved biomass cookstoves. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 14(6), 569–578.Google Scholar
  34. Pick, J. B., Gollakota, K., & Singh, M. (2014). Technology for development: Understanding influences on use of rural telecenters in India. Information Technology for Development, 20(4), 296–323.Google Scholar
  35. Plouffe, C. R., Hulland, J. S., & Vandenbosch, M. (2001). Research report: Richness versus parsimony in modelling technology adoption decisions—Understanding merchant adoption of a smart card-based payment system. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 208–222.Google Scholar
  36. Prahalad, C. K. (2005). Fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: Eradicating poverty through profits. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Publishing.Google Scholar
  37. Rahim, S. A. (1961). The diffusion and adoption of agricultural practices: A study in a village in East Pakistan. Comilla, Bangladesh: East Pakistan Academy of Village Development.Google Scholar
  38. Ramani, S. V., SadreGhazi, S., & Duysters, G. (2012). On the diffusion of toilets as bottom of the pyramid innovation: Lessons from sanitation entrepreneurs. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(4), 676–687.Google Scholar
  39. Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations (1st ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  40. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
  41. Spinney, J. (2011). A chance to catch a breath: Using mobile video ethnography in cycling research. Mobilities, 6(2), 161–182.Google Scholar
  42. Stanley, T. D., & Doucouliagos, H. (2012). Meta-regression analysis in economics and business. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 144–176.Google Scholar
  44. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.Google Scholar
  45. Viswanathan, M., Sridharan, S., & Ritchie, R. (2010). Understanding consumption and entrepreneurship in subsistence marketplaces. Journal of Business Research, 63(6), 570–581.Google Scholar
  46. Viswanathan, M., & Rosa, J. A. (2007). Product and market development for subsistence marketplaces: Consumption and entrepreneurship beyond literacy and resource barriers. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  47. Wood, S. L., & Page Moreau, C. (2006). From fear to loathing? How emotion influences the evaluation and early use of innovations. Journal of Marketing, 70(3), 44–57.Google Scholar
  48. Zikmund, W., D’Alessandro, S., Winzar, H., Lowe, B., & Babin, B. (2016). Marketing research: 4 th Asia Pacific edition. Melbourne, VIC: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sibson Building, Kent Business School, anterburyCanterburyUK
  2. 2.Rennes School of BusinessRennesFrance

Personalised recommendations