The Eastern Gangetic Plains are a densely populated region of South Asia with comparatively low productivity yet a strong potential to intensify production to meet growing food demands. Conservation agriculture-based sustainable intensification (CASI) has gained academic and policy traction in the region, yet despite considerable promotional activities, uptake remains limited. Based on emerging evidence delving beyond a binary classification of adoption, this qualitative study seeks to explore the experiences and perspectives of smallholder farmers who express positive sentiments about CASI, yet have not progressed to (autonomous) adoption. After thematic coding of semi-structured interviews with 44 experimenting farmers and 38 interested non-users, ten common themes emerged that explain why farmers stagnate in their adoption process. Seven of the ten themes were non-specific to CASI and would constraint promotion and uptake of any agri-system change, highlighting the need for contextual clarity when promoting practice changes in smallholder systems. We summaries this to propose the ‘four T's’ that are required to be addressed to enable agricultural change in smallholder systems: Targeting; Training; Targeted incentives; and Time. Through this more nuanced evaluation approach, we argue the need for a stronger focus on enabling environments rather than technological performance evaluations generically, if promotional efforts are to be successful and emerging sustainable intensification technologies are to be adopted by smallholder farmers.

Conservation agriculture-based sustainable intensification (CASI) is gaining prominence as an agricultural pathway to poverty reduction and enhancement of sustainable food systems among government and development actors in the Eastern Gangetic Plains (EGP) of South Asia. Despite substantial investment in research and extension programs and a growing understanding of the agronomic, economic and labor-saving benefits of CASI, uptake remains limited. This study explores farmer experiences and perspectives to establish why farmers choose not to implement CASI systems despite a strong body of recent scientific evidence establishing the benefits of them doing so. Through thematic coding of semi-structured interviews, key constraints are identified, which establishes a narrative that current households' resources are insufficient to enable practice change, alongside limited supporting structures for resource supplementation. Such issues create a dependency on subsidies and outside support, a situation that is likely to impact any farming system change given the low-risk profiles of farmers and their limited resource base. This paper hence sets out broad implications for creating change in smallholder farming systems in order to promote the adoption of sustainable agricultural technologies in resource-poor smallholder contexts, especially with regard to breaking the profound poverty cycles that smallholder farmers find themselves in and which are unlikely to be broken by the current set of technologies promoted to them.