## 5 Discussion
### Limitations and Future Research  
Uncertainty on its own is unclear and its structure and impacts are often debated [44]. This is highlighted by the numerous theories developed in the economic literature, often one theory in contrast with the other. In this research we provided a representation of uncertainty where there is a clear separation between risk, which is exogenous and captured with the accuracy of the ICT, and ambiguity which is a characteristic of the DM's subjective belief. This is a simplification of real decision processes, where uncertainty is not dichotomic and its multiple forms might be indistinctly perceived by DMs. Here, the theory of ambiguity and AA was chosen by the authors because it allows to frame the uncertainty settings occurring when DMs have to decide whether to implement a new ICT or not. However, the capability of the uncertainty framing proposed has to be tested. This might cause over-estimations of the impacts that uncertainty-aversion has on the decisions. On the one hand, other theories might better explain reality and further research carrying out comparative experimental tests would be useful to assess the theoretical background most suitable to represent behaviors toward ICTs. On the other hand, the theory of AA is found by the authors to be the only which allows the modelling of decision dynamics on ICT implementation occurring along the process of familiarity. Because we believe familiarity to be a key target for policies, we consider the theory of AA the most useful in representing the uncertainty settings of the study. Accordingly, the uncertainty which is risk is hard to be modified because intrinsic to the decision environment. For example, risk can be due to: (i) the accuracy of the ICT, which in the short term cannot be raised more than what the state-of-the-art model offers; (ii) or the variability of climate events, which are exogenous to the decisions. In direct contrast, ambiguity can be lowered in the short term by allowing DMs experiencing with the ICT and building knowledge on the ICT reliability. At this end, policies have the capability to ease the process of familiarity, speeding up information uptake.  
Despite the above described limitations, the uncertainty framing proposed in this paper allowed to highlight the main behavioral issues which hinder ICT implementation. Moreover, it can be extended and applied to the broader implementation of technologies in precision agriculture and where the digitalization process is taking place. Here, the use of new tools is widespread, but uncertainties on the real performances or reliability still affects implementation decisions. We consider particularly relevant the topics of: (i) result-based payments to compensate farmers for the provision of ecosystem services and (ii) weather-indexed insurances developed on the basis of agrometeorological models to provide new opportunities for risk management. Environmental uncertainties cause information asymmetries between farmers and the regulator, in case of result-based payments [64], or between farmers and the insurance company in case of weather indexed insurances [65]. ICT-information provision would have a potential key role in lowering uncertainties, while allowing the parts to be to be in the same informational settings. This is true for both result-based payment, where platformscan disseminate to the supplier and the regulator information on the current ecosystem status [66], and index-insurance, where ICTs allow to increase transparency and real time monitoring of losses [67]. Nevertheless, the parts involved in the development of these tools might be unwilling to implement ICTs as they benefit from such asymmetries. Further, if lack of knowledge on the platform's reliability occurs, there will be differences in ambiguity perceptions. The impact of asymmetries in perceptions can be expected to lower the economic efficiency of these new insurance or policy tools.