Masters Desertation Presentation 2008

11

FARMERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE FARMERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SASAKAWA EFFECTIVENESS OF SASAKAWA

GLOBAL 2000 PROGRAMME GLOBAL 2000 PROGRAMME APPROACH TO AGRICULTURAL APPROACH TO AGRICULTURAL

TECHNOLOGY DELIVERY IN TECHNOLOGY DELIVERY IN NORTHERN MALAWINORTHERN MALAWI

BYBY

FRANCIS WAKISA CHILENGAFRANCIS WAKISA CHILENGA

MPhil. Thesis Seminar

22

OutlineOutline Background to the studyBackground to the study Statement of the problemStatement of the problem Research objectives & hypothesesResearch objectives & hypotheses Justification of the studyJustification of the study The study areaThe study area Conceptual framework Conceptual framework Research methodologyResearch methodology Research FindingsResearch Findings Conclusions & recommendations Conclusions & recommendations Future research directionFuture research direction

33

Background to the studyBackground to the study

In Malawi, agriculture accounts for In Malawi, agriculture accounts for about 90% of export earnings, about 90% of export earnings, provides 85% of total employment & provides 85% of total employment & contributes about 39% of the contributes about 39% of the country’s GDP(FAO, 2005).country’s GDP(FAO, 2005).

For the agricultural sector to play For the agricultural sector to play this crucial role in the economy in a this crucial role in the economy in a sustainable way, rapid growth in sustainable way, rapid growth in output and productivity is critical. output and productivity is critical.

44

Background to the study/Background to the study/……

The sustained flow and utilization of The sustained flow and utilization of improved technologies is key to improved technologies is key to increased growth and productivity.increased growth and productivity.

Small farms, low yields and Small farms, low yields and unpredictable policies result in unpredictable policies result in chronic food shortages.chronic food shortages.

Nationally, about 40 percent of the Nationally, about 40 percent of the rural households produce less food rural households produce less food than they need.than they need.

55


Demand for food likely to increase since Demand for food likely to increase since the population is still growing (population the population is still growing (population is estimated at around 13.5 million. is estimated at around 13.5 million. Estimated annual growth rate of approx. Estimated annual growth rate of approx. 3.0 % (GoM,2006). 3.0 % (GoM,2006).

Main agricultural technology devt and Main agricultural technology devt and dissemination effort in Malawi 1980s & dissemination effort in Malawi 1980s & 1990s)=the Agricultural Services Project 1990s)=the Agricultural Services Project (ASP) which focused on farming systems (ASP) which focused on farming systems methodologiesmethodologies

66

Background to the study/…Background to the study/…

Extension efforts were based on the Block Extension efforts were based on the Block Extension System (BES), a modified form Extension System (BES), a modified form of the Training and Visit (T&V) system of the Training and Visit (T&V) system

Hierarchical nature of technology Hierarchical nature of technology development and dissemination made it development and dissemination made it very difficult to create a farmer very difficult to create a farmer responsive system. responsive system.

Existing low levels of productivity and Existing low levels of productivity and low use of modern farming practices low use of modern farming practices hinder efforts to achieve progress in hinder efforts to achieve progress in agriculture. agriculture.

77


SG2000 been a prominent NGO in efforts SG2000 been a prominent NGO in efforts directed at the dissemination of improved directed at the dissemination of improved technology to smallholder farmers and the technology to smallholder farmers and the improvement of farmers’ practices in 14 improvement of farmers’ practices in 14 Sub-Saharan African countries including Sub-Saharan African countries including MalawiMalawi..

The SG2000 approach is based on the The SG2000 approach is based on the principle that ‘agricultural development principle that ‘agricultural development cannot be achieved unless farmers have cannot be achieved unless farmers have greater access to science-based agriculturegreater access to science-based agriculture

88


Main features of the SG 2000 Approach Main features of the SG 2000 Approach are:are:• Public-private partnership in agric. Public-private partnership in agric.

Services delivery,Services delivery,• Direct farmer participation in Direct farmer participation in

technology transfer, andtechnology transfer, and• Promotion of agricultural intensification Promotion of agricultural intensification

with appropriate, financially viable with appropriate, financially viable technologytechnology

99


SG2000 focus was on disseminating SG2000 focus was on disseminating improved maize production improved maize production technologies to small scale farmers. technologies to small scale farmers. Main activities consisted of;Main activities consisted of;

demonstration of on-shelf and ‘best demonstration of on-shelf and ‘best bet’ maize production practices and bet’ maize production practices and conservation farmingconservation farming

1010

Problem StatementProblem Statement

Achieving sustainable food security in Malawi Achieving sustainable food security in Malawi requires that farmers continuously adopt requires that farmers continuously adopt improved agricultural production improved agricultural production technologies in order to realize yield technologies in order to realize yield potentials from decreasing land resource potentials from decreasing land resource base.base.

Although some programme reviews were Although some programme reviews were conducted about SG2000 programme conducted about SG2000 programme activities in Malawi, these focused activities in Malawi, these focused specifically on SG2000 contributions to specifically on SG2000 contributions to increased crop yields; the govt’s commitment increased crop yields; the govt’s commitment to taking up SG2000 tech. transfer activities; to taking up SG2000 tech. transfer activities; and recommendations for improving on-going and recommendations for improving on-going country programme activitiescountry programme activities

1111

Problem Statement/…Problem Statement/…

After nine (9) yrs of SG2000 interventions After nine (9) yrs of SG2000 interventions in Malawi (1998-2006) a comprehensive in Malawi (1998-2006) a comprehensive study to assess the effectiveness of the study to assess the effectiveness of the SG2000 programme approach to SG2000 programme approach to agricultural technology transfer not yet agricultural technology transfer not yet conductedconducted

Hence this proposed study which was Hence this proposed study which was aimed at bridging this gap. Specifically the aimed at bridging this gap. Specifically the study was set to provide answers to the study was set to provide answers to the following questions:following questions:

what was the level of farmers’ participation what was the level of farmers’ participation in SG2000 prog. activities?in SG2000 prog. activities?

1212

Problem Problem StatementStatement/…/… how did farmers’ perceive the effectiveness how did farmers’ perceive the effectiveness

of management training plots as method for of management training plots as method for technology transfer?technology transfer?

what are farmers’ adoption levels of the what are farmers’ adoption levels of the technologies disseminated to-date under the technologies disseminated to-date under the SG2000 programme?SG2000 programme?

what was the level of farmers’ satisfaction what was the level of farmers’ satisfaction with the technological package disseminated?with the technological package disseminated?

what are the constraints preventing farmers what are the constraints preventing farmers from adopting the technological from adopting the technological recommendations? recommendations?

1313

Objectives of the StudyObjectives of the Study The main objective was to assess farmers’ The main objective was to assess farmers’

perceptions of the effectiveness of SG2000 perceptions of the effectiveness of SG2000 Programme Approach to agricultural technology Programme Approach to agricultural technology delivery in Northern Malawi.delivery in Northern Malawi.

Specific objectives of the study were to:Specific objectives of the study were to: describe the demographic and socio-economic describe the demographic and socio-economic

characteristics of participating farmers in terms characteristics of participating farmers in terms of sex, age, formal education, hhsize, farm of sex, age, formal education, hhsize, farm labour sources, land holding size, yrs of farming labour sources, land holding size, yrs of farming experience, level of income, major crops grown experience, level of income, major crops grown in the area, access to farm credit, sources of in the area, access to farm credit, sources of extension services and extension teaching extension services and extension teaching methods. methods.

1414

Objectives of the study/…Objectives of the study/… examine farmers’ perceptions of their examine farmers’ perceptions of their

level of participation in the SG 2000 level of participation in the SG 2000 programme activities,programme activities,

examine farmers’ perceptions of the examine farmers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the management effectiveness of the management training plot as a method for training plot as a method for technology delivery in SG 2000 technology delivery in SG 2000 programme,programme,

examine the degree of farmers’ examine the degree of farmers’ satisfaction with the technological satisfaction with the technological package disseminated under the SG package disseminated under the SG 2000 programme,2000 programme,

1515

Objectives of the study/…Objectives of the study/… examine farmers’ adoption levels of the examine farmers’ adoption levels of the

technologies disseminated under SG 2000 technologies disseminated under SG 2000 programmeprogramme

identify the constraints to non-adoption of identify the constraints to non-adoption of technological recommendations under the SG technological recommendations under the SG 2000 programme, and 2000 programme, and

examine the relationships between selected examine the relationships between selected farmers’ demographic and socio-economic farmers’ demographic and socio-economic characteristics and their perceptions of the characteristics and their perceptions of the effectiveness of the SG 2000 programme effectiveness of the SG 2000 programme approach to agricultural technology delivery,approach to agricultural technology delivery,

1616

HypothesesHypotheses

Hypothesis 1Hypothesis 1 H0: There are no significant differences in H0: There are no significant differences in

farmers’ perceptions of level of participation, farmers’ perceptions of level of participation, effectiveness of MTP, level of satisfaction and effectiveness of MTP, level of satisfaction and level of adoption between Rumphi and level of adoption between Rumphi and Chitipa districtsChitipa districts

H1: There are significant differences in H1: There are significant differences in farmers’ perceptions of level of participation, farmers’ perceptions of level of participation, effectiveness of MTP, level of satisfaction and effectiveness of MTP, level of satisfaction and level of adoption between Rumphi and level of adoption between Rumphi and Chitipa districtsChitipa districts

1717

Hypotheses/…Hypotheses/…

Hypothesis 2Hypothesis 2 H0: There are no significant differences in H0: There are no significant differences in

perceptions of level of participation, perceptions of level of participation, effectiveness of MTP, level of satisfaction and effectiveness of MTP, level of satisfaction and level of adoption between male and female level of adoption between male and female participants participants

H1: There are significant differences in H1: There are significant differences in perceptions of level of participation, perceptions of level of participation, effectiveness of MTP, level of satisfaction and effectiveness of MTP, level of satisfaction and level of adoption between between male and level of adoption between between male and female participantsfemale participants

1818

Hypotheses/Hypotheses/……

Hypothesis 3Hypothesis 3 H0: There is no significant relationship H0: There is no significant relationship

between farmers’ level of participation and between farmers’ level of participation and their socio-demographic characteristics such their socio-demographic characteristics such as age, gender, level of income, years of as age, gender, level of income, years of farming experience, level of formal farming experience, level of formal education, and access to credit.education, and access to credit.

H1: Farmers’ level of participation is H1: Farmers’ level of participation is significantly related to their and socio-significantly related to their and socio-demographic characteristics such as age, demographic characteristics such as age, gender, level of income, years of farming gender, level of income, years of farming experience, level of formal education, and experience, level of formal education, and access to credit.access to credit.

1919


Hypothesis 4Hypothesis 4 H0:H0: There is no significant relationship There is no significant relationship

between level of technology adoption by between level of technology adoption by farmers and their demographic and socio-farmers and their demographic and socio-economic characteristics.economic characteristics.

H1:H1: Level of technology adoption is Level of technology adoption is significantly related to farmers’ significantly related to farmers’ demographic and socio-economic demographic and socio-economic characteristics. characteristics.

2020


Hypothesis 5Hypothesis 5 H0: There is no relationship between H0: There is no relationship between

technology adoption and the level of technology adoption and the level of farmers’ participation in the SG 2000 farmers’ participation in the SG 2000 Programme.Programme.

H1: Technology adoption is significantly H1: Technology adoption is significantly related to the level of farmers’ related to the level of farmers’ participation in the SG 2000 Programme. participation in the SG 2000 Programme.

2121


Hypothesis 6Hypothesis 6 H0: There is no significant relationship H0: There is no significant relationship

between farmers’ perceptions of the between farmers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of management training plot effectiveness of management training plot to technology transfer and their level of to technology transfer and their level of participation in the SG 2000 Programme.participation in the SG 2000 Programme.

H1: Farmers’ perception of the H1: Farmers’ perception of the effectiveness of the management training effectiveness of the management training plot to technology delivery is significantly plot to technology delivery is significantly related to their level of participation in the related to their level of participation in the programme.programme.

2222

JustificationJustification

This study has documented strengths and This study has documented strengths and weaknesses of SG 2000 Programme Approach weaknesses of SG 2000 Programme Approach to agricultural technology delivery in to agricultural technology delivery in Northern Malawi over the past nine (9) years. Northern Malawi over the past nine (9) years.

By pointing out the strengths and weaknesses By pointing out the strengths and weaknesses of the SG 2000 Programme Approach the of the SG 2000 Programme Approach the study findings could provide guidance to SG study findings could provide guidance to SG 2000 Programme or any other related 2000 Programme or any other related programme implemented along SG 2000 lines programme implemented along SG 2000 lines for enhancing the effectiveness of agricultural for enhancing the effectiveness of agricultural technology delivery.technology delivery.

2323

Justification/Justification/…… Another benefit from the study could be Another benefit from the study could be

provision of the current state of maize provision of the current state of maize production technologies adoption levels by production technologies adoption levels by farmers. farmers.

By assessing the level of adoption of maize By assessing the level of adoption of maize production technologies disseminated production technologies disseminated under SG 2000 Programme and the factors under SG 2000 Programme and the factors influencing adoption, the study findings influencing adoption, the study findings have provided information that could be have provided information that could be used by policy makers, researchers and used by policy makers, researchers and extension agents to design appropriate extension agents to design appropriate strategies for improving and increasing strategies for improving and increasing agricultural production in the country. agricultural production in the country.

2424

Literature ReviewLiterature Review

Literature review covered the following areas:Literature review covered the following areas: Meaning of agricultural extensionMeaning of agricultural extension Agricultural extension goalsAgricultural extension goals Agricultural extension modelsAgricultural extension models Agricultural extension in MalawiAgricultural extension in Malawi SG2000 Programme in Malawi (1998-2006)SG2000 Programme in Malawi (1998-2006) Extension communication methodsExtension communication methods Farmer participation in agricultural extension Farmer participation in agricultural extension

prog.prog. Adoption and diffusion of innovationsAdoption and diffusion of innovations Adoption of maize prodn technologies in SS Adoption of maize prodn technologies in SS

AfricaAfrica

2525

Figure 1: A Conceptual Framework Figure 1: A Conceptual Framework of the SG2000 Approach of the SG2000 Approach EffectivenessEffectiveness

Farmer perception of the technology

Extension Method

Source: Author construct

Effectiveness of the approach

Level of Participation (in

Planning,Implementn,Monitoring &Evaluation)

Farmer’s socio-economic & demographiccharacteristics

Level of technology adoption

Level of satisfaction

with technology

2626

Figure 2: Location of Study Figure 2: Location of Study AreaArea

2727

Research DesignResearch Design A descriptive-correlational survey research A descriptive-correlational survey research

design was used for this study. design was used for this study. Objective was to describe the nature of the Objective was to describe the nature of the

situation as it existed at the time of the survey.situation as it existed at the time of the survey. A correlational procedure was preferred to A correlational procedure was preferred to

enable the researcher to determine the extent enable the researcher to determine the extent of relationship existing between variables. of relationship existing between variables.

Also enabled the researcher to test the Also enabled the researcher to test the hypotheses about the relationships between hypotheses about the relationships between variables as well as assess the magnitude and variables as well as assess the magnitude and direction of the relationshipsdirection of the relationships

2828

Sampling and Sample SizeSampling and Sample Size

All farmers who participated in the SG2000 All farmers who participated in the SG2000 Programme between 1998-2006 made up the Programme between 1998-2006 made up the population of study.population of study.

Lists of participating farmers were obtained Lists of participating farmers were obtained from the respective district agriculture from the respective district agriculture offices (245 and 155 for Chitipa & Rumphi offices (245 and 155 for Chitipa & Rumphi respectively)respectively)

194 farmers were selected using a 194 farmers were selected using a proportionate stratified random sampling proportionate stratified random sampling procedure (at 95% CL sample was deemed procedure (at 95% CL sample was deemed adequate supported by Krejcie & Morgan, adequate supported by Krejcie & Morgan, 1970)1970)

2929

InstrumentationInstrumentation An interview schedule was used to collect data An interview schedule was used to collect data

from the selected farmers.from the selected farmers. First section captured data on socio-economic First section captured data on socio-economic

characteristics of farmers-(level of formal characteristics of farmers-(level of formal education, land holding size, farm labour type, education, land holding size, farm labour type, level of income), and farmers’ access to credit.level of income), and farmers’ access to credit.

Second section captured data on level of Second section captured data on level of farmer participation, level of technology farmer participation, level of technology adoption and level of farmer satisfaction with adoption and level of farmer satisfaction with technologies.A five point Likert-type scale technologies.A five point Likert-type scale ranging from 5=very high to 1=very low was ranging from 5=very high to 1=very low was used to measure the perceptionsused to measure the perceptions. .

3030

Instrumentation/Instrumentation/…… In addition the 2In addition the 2ndnd section also captured data section also captured data

relating to farmers’ perceptions of the relating to farmers’ perceptions of the effectiveness of MTPs and SG2000 also using a effectiveness of MTPs and SG2000 also using a five-point Likert-type scale ranging from five-point Likert-type scale ranging from 5=very effective to 1=very ineffective5=very effective to 1=very ineffective

Third section captured data relating to Third section captured data relating to respondents’ demographic characteristics (age, respondents’ demographic characteristics (age, gender, household size)gender, household size)

The last section captured control data such as The last section captured control data such as district, village, and respondent’s code number.district, village, and respondent’s code number.

Both open-ended and close-ended questions Both open-ended and close-ended questions were included in the instrument.were included in the instrument.

3131

Instrumentation/…Instrumentation/…

Both face validity and content validity Both face validity and content validity were determined. were determined.

Pilot testing was done on 20 farmers.Pilot testing was done on 20 farmers. A Cronbach-Alpha coefficient set at 0.7 A Cronbach-Alpha coefficient set at 0.7

was calculated to determine the reliability was calculated to determine the reliability of the instrument. of the instrument.

Reliability coefficients for Likert-scale Reliability coefficients for Likert-scale data ranged from 0.704 to 0.834 implying data ranged from 0.704 to 0.834 implying consistency in the responsesconsistency in the responses

3232

Data AnalysisData Analysis Data were cleaned, coded and analysed Data were cleaned, coded and analysed

using SPSS computer software.using SPSS computer software. Data measured on likert scale were treated Data measured on likert scale were treated

as interval level data.as interval level data. Descriptive statistics such as means, freq. Descriptive statistics such as means, freq.

distributions, SDs were used to describe the distributions, SDs were used to describe the nature of the data obtainednature of the data obtained

Pearson product moment correlation Pearson product moment correlation coefficient was computed to establish coefficient was computed to establish relationships between the following selected relationships between the following selected variables: level of participation, perceived variables: level of participation, perceived effectiveness of MTPs, effectiveness of MTPs,

3333

Data Analysis/…Data Analysis/…

level of technology adoption, age, level of technology adoption, age, gender, level of formal education, farm gender, level of formal education, farm labour type, land holding size, yrs of labour type, land holding size, yrs of farming experience, access to credit andfarming experience, access to credit and

To test if there were any significant To test if there were any significant differences between means across differences between means across districts and gender of farmers on districts and gender of farmers on perceptions of farmers’ level of perceptions of farmers’ level of participation, & level of adoption of participation, & level of adoption of technologies) an independent sample t-technologies) an independent sample t-test was computed.test was computed.

3434

Data Analysis/…Data Analysis/…

A stepwise multiple regression analysis A stepwise multiple regression analysis for variables exhibiting significant for variables exhibiting significant relationships was run to identify best relationships was run to identify best predictors of the effectiveness of SG2000 predictors of the effectiveness of SG2000 technology transfer model. technology transfer model.

An alpha of 0.05 was set as a priori in all An alpha of 0.05 was set as a priori in all the analysis of test of statistical the analysis of test of statistical significancessignificances

3535

Research FindingsResearch Findings

OutlineOutline Demographics & socio-econ. Characteristics of Demographics & socio-econ. Characteristics of

farmersfarmers Perception of level of participationPerception of level of participation Perception of effectiveness of MTPPerception of effectiveness of MTP Perception of level of satisfaction with Perception of level of satisfaction with

technologies disseminatedtechnologies disseminated Perception of level of adoption of tech.Perception of level of adoption of tech. Mean differences between male & female, and Mean differences between male & female, and

across districts for selected variablesacross districts for selected variables Correlation matrix of selected variablesCorrelation matrix of selected variables Predictors of the SG2000 Approach effectivenessPredictors of the SG2000 Approach effectiveness

3636

Table 1: Sex of respondent farmers

SexSex FrequencyFrequency %%

MaleMale 106106 54.654.6

FemaleFemale 8888 45.445.4

TotalTotal 194194 100.0100.0

3737

Table 2: Age distribution of Table 2: Age distribution of farmersfarmers

Age groupAge group frequencyfrequency %%

20-2920-29 2323 11.911.9

30-3930-39 5555 28.428.4

40-4940-49 5454 27.827.8

50-5950-59 3535 18.018.0

60-6960-69 1919 9.89.8

70+70+ 88 4.14.1

TotalTotal 194194 100.0100.0

Mean=44, SD=12.7, Range=57

3838

Table 3 : Educ. level of Table 3 : Educ. level of farmersfarmers

Level of formal Level of formal educationeducation

freqfreq %% Cum.%Cum.%

Some primary Some primary schoolingschooling

4848 24.724.7 24.724.7

Completed primaryCompleted primary 8181 41.841.8 66.566.5

J secondary educationJ secondary education 2929 14.914.9 81.481.4

Senior secondary Senior secondary education.education.

2222 11.311.3 92.892.8

Tertiary educationTertiary education 44 2.12.1 94.894.8

No formal educationNo formal education 1010 5.25.2 100.0100.0

TotalTotal 194194 100.100.00

Source: Field data (2007)

3939

Table 4: Household size Table 4: Household size distribution of respondentsdistribution of respondentsHH sizeHH size freqfreq %% Cum.%Cum.%

22 33 1.51.5 1.51.5

3-53-5 5959 30.430.4 32.032.0

6-86-8 9696 49.549.5 81.481.4

9-119-11 3535 18.018.0 99.599.5

12+12+ 11 0.50.5 100.0100.0

TotalTotal 194194 100.0100.0

Mean=6.6, SD=2.06, Range=10

4040

Table 5: Distribution of farm Table 5: Distribution of farm labour sources among farmerslabour sources among farmers

Source of labourSource of labour Freq.Freq. %%

Family onlyFamily only 6666 34.034.0

Casual onlyCasual only 44 2.12.1

Regular Regular 33 1.51.5

Both family & Both family & casualcasual

9797 50.050.0

Both family & Both family & regularregular

2424 12.412.4

TotalTotal 194194 100.0100.0

4141

Table 6: Distribution of Table 6: Distribution of landholding sizelandholding size

Landholding size (ha)Landholding size (ha) Freq.Freq. %%

Less than 1haLess than 1ha 2424 12.412.4

1.0-2.99 ha1.0-2.99 ha 9393 47.947.9

3.0-4.99 ha3.0-4.99 ha 5454 27.827.8

5.0ha or more5.0ha or more 2323 11.911.9

TotalTotal 194194 100.0100.0

Mean=2.39, SD=0.85

4242

Table 7: distribution of years Table 7: distribution of years of farming experienceof farming experience

Yrs of Yrs of farmingfarming

Freq.Freq. %% Cum.%Cum.%

<5<5 1111 5.75.7 5.75.7

5-145-14 5151 26.326.3 32.032.0

15-2415-24 7272 37.137.1 69.169.1

25-3425-34 3434 17.517.5 86.686.6

35-4435-44 1919 9.89.8 96.496.4

45-5445-54 77 3.63.6 100.0100.0

TotalTotal 194194 100.0100.0Mean=20.39, SD=11.32, Range=48

4343

Table 8: distribution of income Table 8: distribution of income levels of respondentslevels of respondents

Note: US$1.00=MK141.87 (Reserve Bank of Malawi, Note: US$1.00=MK141.87 (Reserve Bank of Malawi, 2007)2007)

Income categoryIncome category Freq.Freq. %%

<MK29,999<MK29,999 5959 30.430.4

MK30,000-MK30,000-MK49,000MK49,000

4444 22.722.7

MK50,000-MK50,000-MK69,000MK69,000

4242 21.621.6

MK70,000-MK70,000-MK89,000MK89,000

2424 12.412.4

MK90,000-MK90,000-MK109,000MK109,000

1212 6.26.2

>MK110,000>MK110,000 1313 6.76.7

TotalTotal 194194 100.0100.0

4444

Table 9: major crops grown as Table 9: major crops grown as reported by farmersreported by farmersCropCrop Freq.Freq. %%

MaizeMaize 194194 100.0100.0

G/nutsG/nuts 180180 92.892.8

P. BeansP. Beans 137137 70.670.6

TobaccoTobacco 126126 64.964.9

S/potatoesS/potatoes 166166 85.685.6

PaprikaPaprika 2222 11.311.3

CassavaCassava 141141 72.772.7

MilletMillet 2727 13.913.9

SunflowerSunflower 1818 9.39.3

SoybeansSoybeans 9595 49.049.0

4545

Table 10: Utilisation of major crops Table 10: Utilisation of major crops grown grown CropCrop Home Home

consumption consumption (%)(%)

Cash Cash (%)(%)

Both cash & Both cash & home home consumption consumption (%)(%)

MaizeMaize 9.89.8 -- 90.290.2

G/nutsG/nuts 35.135.1 -- 58.258.2

P. BeansP. Beans 51.551.5 0.50.5 18.618.6

TobaccoTobacco -- 64.964.9 --

S/potatoesS/potatoes 59.359.3 -- 26.326.3

PaprikaPaprika -- 11.311.3 --

CassavaCassava 24.724.7 1.01.0 46.946.9

MilletMillet 2.62.6 0.50.5 10.310.3

SunflowerSunflower 2.12.1 -- 6.76.7

SoybeansSoybeans 5.75.7 2.62.6 42.342.3Source: Field data (2007)

4646

Table 11: Respondent-farmers’ Table 11: Respondent-farmers’ accessing farm creditaccessing farm credit

ResponsResponsee

frequencyfrequency Percent (%)Percent (%)

YesYes 146146 75.375.3

NoNo 4848 24.724.7

TotalTotal 194194 100100

Credit sources:Credit sources: Formal banks=1.5%Formal banks=1.5% Money lenders (informal)=1.0%Money lenders (informal)=1.0% NGOs=74.7NGOs=74.7%%

4747

Table 12: Sources of agric. Table 12: Sources of agric. extension servicesextension services

SourceSource FrequencFrequencyy

PercenPercent (%)t (%)

Government extension Government extension staffstaff

194194 100100

Fellow farmersFellow farmers 6363 32.532.5

NGO extension staffNGO extension staff 8484 43.343.3

Farmer-based Farmer-based organisationsorganisations

77 3.63.6

4848

Table 13: Extension teaching Table 13: Extension teaching methods as experienced by methods as experienced by respondent-farmersrespondent-farmers

Extension methodExtension method Freq.Freq. %%

Results Results demonstrationdemonstration

9797 50.050.0

Method Method demonstrationdemonstration

184184 94.894.8

Farm exhibitsFarm exhibits 3737 19.119.1

RadioRadio 4848 24.724.7

LeafletsLeaflets 4545 23.223.2

PostersPosters 4040 20.620.6

Farm magazinesFarm magazines 55 2.62.6

Group discussionsGroup discussions 8383 42.342.3

Field daysField days 172172 88.788.7Source: Field data (2007)

4949

Table 14: Farmers’ Table 14: Farmers’ perceptions of their level of perceptions of their level of participation in SG 2000 Progparticipation in SG 2000 Prog..Items Items Mean Mean SDSD

Participation in planning Participation in planning project activitiesproject activities

4.504.50 0.720.72

Attendance of meetingsAttendance of meetings 4.064.06 0.950.95

Organising field daysOrganising field days 3.533.53 2.592.59

Group discussionsGroup discussions 3.623.62 1.451.45

Organising farmers meetingsOrganising farmers meetings 3.073.07 1.441.44

Joint monitoring Joint monitoring 4.124.12 0.710.71

Joint evaluationJoint evaluation 4.094.09 0.910.91

Overall mean=3.83, SD=0.84, Range=1.43

5050

Table 15: Farmers’ Table 15: Farmers’ perceptions of the perceptions of the effectiveness of the MTPeffectiveness of the MTP..

Items Items Mean Mean SDSD

Provide technical information on Provide technical information on maize productionmaize production

4.644.64 0.600.60

Able to obtain high yieldsAble to obtain high yields 4.814.81 0.460.46

Enhance farmers, interest in the Enhance farmers, interest in the demonstrated technologiesdemonstrated technologies

4.694.69 0.550.55

Generate active farmer Generate active farmer participationparticipation

4.634.63 0.580.58


5151

Table 16: Farmers’ level of Table 16: Farmers’ level of satisfaction with the satisfaction with the technologies disseminatedtechnologies disseminated

Items Items Mean Mean SD SD

Satisfaction with plant spacing Satisfaction with plant spacing (25cm)(25cm)

4.594.59 0.530.53

Satisfaction with row spacing Satisfaction with row spacing (75cm)(75cm)

4.744.74 0.530.53

Satisfaction with use improved Satisfaction with use improved varietiesvarieties

4.744.74 0.510.51

Satisfaction with use of inorganic Satisfaction with use of inorganic fertilizersfertilizers

4.754.75 0.440.44

Satisfaction with fertilizer Satisfaction with fertilizer application methodapplication method

4.514.51 0.590.59

Satisfaction with use of Satisfaction with use of herbicides/conservation farmingherbicides/conservation farming

4.054.05 1.001.00Overall mean=4.56, SD=0.43, Range=0.7

5252

Conservation farming in practiceConservation farming in practice

5353

Table 17: Farmers’ level of Table 17: Farmers’ level of adoption of the technologies adoption of the technologies disseminateddisseminated

Items Items Mean Mean SD SD

Adoption of plant spacing (25cm)Adoption of plant spacing (25cm) 4.304.30 0.550.55

Adoption of row spacing (75cm)Adoption of row spacing (75cm) 4.474.47 0.580.58

Adoption of use improved Adoption of use improved varietiesvarieties

4.474.47 0.580.58

Adoption of use of inorganic Adoption of use of inorganic fertilizersfertilizers

4.484.48 0.550.55

Adoption of fertilizer application Adoption of fertilizer application methodmethod

4.234.23 0.580.58

Adoption of use of Adoption of use of herbicides/conservation farming herbicides/conservation farming

3.613.61 0.950.95


5454

Table 18: Constraints to Table 18: Constraints to technology adoptiontechnology adoption

TechnoloTechnologygy

ConstraintConstraint Freq.Freq. %%

Plant Plant spacingspacing

High labour demandHigh labour demand 125125 64.464.4

Intercropping potential Intercropping potential ltdltd

22 1.01.0

Row Row spacingspacing


Intercropping potential Intercropping potential ltdltd

11 0.50.5

Improved Improved varietiesvarieties

High costs of seedHigh costs of seed 8585 43.843.8

Inadequate mkt facilities Inadequate mkt facilities to absorb farm produceto absorb farm produce

11 0.50.5

Improved varieties not Improved varieties not drought tolerantdrought tolerant

33 1.51.5

Resistant to pests & Resistant to pests & diseases diseases

55 2.62.6

5555

Table 19: Constraints to Table 19: Constraints to technology adoption/…technology adoption/…

TechnologyTechnology constraintconstraint Freq.Freq. %%

Use of Use of inorganic fert.inorganic fert.

High costs of High costs of fertiliserfertiliser

9696 49.549.5

Fert. Fert. application application methodmethod


Use of Use of herbicidesherbicides

High labour High labour requirement in terms requirement in terms of spraying & residue of spraying & residue incorporationincorporation

2020 10.310.3

High costs of High costs of herbicides herbicides

102102 52.652.6

High infestation of High infestation of termites termites

11 0.50.5

High carry-over of High carry-over of pests and diseases pests and diseases

5454 27.827.8

5656

Table 20: An independent Table 20: An independent sample t-test analysis by sample t-test analysis by sampled districtsampled district

Sub-scoreSub-score districdistrictt

nn meameann

SDSD t (2-t (2-tailed)tailed)

Sig.Sig.

Level of Level of participation in participation in the programmethe programme

RumphRumphii

ChitipaChitipa

7575

111199

4.654.65

3.323.320.480.48

0.550.5516.93216.932 .000.000

MTP effectivenessMTP effectiveness RumphRumphii

ChitipaChitipa

7575

111199

4.784.78

4.644.640.380.38

0.510.512.1242.124 .035.035

Level of Level of satisfaction with satisfaction with the technologiesthe technologies

RumphRumphii

ChitipaChitipa

7575

111199

4.614.61

4.534.530.230.23

0.510.511.2051.205 .230.230

Level of adoption Level of adoption of the of the technologiestechnologies

RumphRumphii

ChitipaChitipa

7575

111199

4.594.59

4.054.050.230.23

0.440.449.6879.687 .000.000P<0.05

5757

Table 21: an independent Table 21: an independent sample t-test analysis by sex of sample t-test analysis by sex of respondentsrespondentsSub-scoreSub-score sese

xxnn meanmean SDSD t (2-t (2-

tailedtailed))

Sig.Sig.

Level of Level of participation in the participation in the programmeprogramme

FF

MM8888

1061063.813.81

3.853.850.730.73

0.920.92-0.301-0.301 .764.764

MTP effectivenessMTP effectiveness FF

MM8888

1061064.554.55

4.814.810.540.54

0.360.36-3.842-3.842 .000.000

Level of satisfaction Level of satisfaction with the with the technologiestechnologies

FF

MM8888

1061064.464.46

4.654.650.480.48

0.350.35-3.101-3.101 .002.002

Level of adoption of Level of adoption of the technologiesthe technologies

FF

MM8888

1061064.224.22

4.294.290.480.48

0.430.43-1.110-1.110 .268.268

P<0.05

5858

Table 22: Summary of results Table 22: Summary of results of a step wise regression of a step wise regression analysisanalysis

Predictors Predictors Beta Beta R-R-squarsquaree

Adj. Adj. R-R-squarsquaree

Std Std errorerror

F F ChangChangee

Sig.Sig.

Constant Constant 1.5551.555 .157.157 .000.000

Perception of Perception of MTP MTP effectivenesseffectiveness

-0.135-0.135 .109.109 .104.104 .031.031 23.51723.517 .000.000

Access to farm Access to farm creditcredit

0.0940.094 .145.145 .136.136 .033.033 7.9147.914 .005.005

5959

Major conclusionsMajor conclusions A majority of the respondent-farmers are still A majority of the respondent-farmers are still

young (mean age=44 years) and by young (mean age=44 years) and by implication have the ability to carry out implication have the ability to carry out farming activities.farming activities.

At the time of the survey, a majority of farmers At the time of the survey, a majority of farmers were found to cultivate a small amount of their were found to cultivate a small amount of their own land (landholdings of 1-2.99 hectares) own land (landholdings of 1-2.99 hectares) with mean land holding size of 2.39 hectares.with mean land holding size of 2.39 hectares.

A majority of farmers identified group contact A majority of farmers identified group contact extension methods as most popular extension extension methods as most popular extension teaching methods used by extension workers teaching methods used by extension workers in their area in their area

6060

Major conclusions/…Major conclusions/… The SG 2000 Programme Approach The SG 2000 Programme Approach

attracted a higher level of farmer attracted a higher level of farmer participation particularly in such areas as participation particularly in such areas as planning, monitoring and evaluation of planning, monitoring and evaluation of project activities project activities

The management training plot which was The management training plot which was probably the principal extension teaching probably the principal extension teaching method was rated as being very effective in method was rated as being very effective in provision of maize production knowledge, provision of maize production knowledge, yield improvements, stimulating farmer yield improvements, stimulating farmer interest in the disseminated technologies interest in the disseminated technologies and eliciting active farmer participation.and eliciting active farmer participation.

6161

Major conclusions/…Major conclusions/… Gender was found to have a significant Gender was found to have a significant

influence on farmers’ perception of the influence on farmers’ perception of the management training plot and their level of management training plot and their level of satisfaction with technologies.satisfaction with technologies.

Level of farmer participation in the SG 2000 Level of farmer participation in the SG 2000 Programme was found to have a strong and Programme was found to have a strong and significant relationship with level of significant relationship with level of adoption of technologies disseminateadoption of technologies disseminate

The management training plot and access to The management training plot and access to farm credit were the only factors found to farm credit were the only factors found to explain the effectiveness of the SG 2000 explain the effectiveness of the SG 2000 Programme Approach.Programme Approach.

6262

Recommendations Recommendations To address the problem of shrinking land To address the problem of shrinking land

holdings among smallholder farmers in holdings among smallholder farmers in the longer-term, the GoM should ensure the longer-term, the GoM should ensure security of tenure and distribute land to security of tenure and distribute land to the landless or near landless. Ensuring the landless or near landless. Ensuring security of tenure will help in developing security of tenure will help in developing the land market, which may have the land market, which may have implications of increased agricultural implications of increased agricultural productivity such as facilitating access productivity such as facilitating access to financial or physical capital.to financial or physical capital.

6363

Recommendations/…Recommendations/… MoAFS through the Department of Extension MoAFS through the Department of Extension

Services should promote appropriate extension Services should promote appropriate extension teaching methods such as group contact teaching methods such as group contact methods to pass across technologies given the methods to pass across technologies given the nature of the technology to disseminate.nature of the technology to disseminate.

The management training plot (MTP) as a The management training plot (MTP) as a method of agricultural technology delivery method of agricultural technology delivery should be promoted and mainstreamed into should be promoted and mainstreamed into public extension programmes to enhance public extension programmes to enhance farmer acquisition of knowledge and skills in farmer acquisition of knowledge and skills in new technologies.new technologies.

6464

Recommendations/…Recommendations/…

MoAFS should promote farmer MoAFS should promote farmer participation in planning, participation in planning, implementation, monitoring and implementation, monitoring and evaluation of different agricultural evaluation of different agricultural extension programme activities for extension programme activities for sustained adoption of technologies. To sustained adoption of technologies. To be achieved through be achieved through institutionalization of participatory institutionalization of participatory extension approaches for increased extension approaches for increased farmer participation.farmer participation.

6565

Recommendations/…Recommendations/… The significant differences between men The significant differences between men

and women in their perceptions of the and women in their perceptions of the MTP and level of satisfaction with the MTP and level of satisfaction with the technologies is an indication that there technologies is an indication that there are gender differences in farming are gender differences in farming systems. To address this, project systems. To address this, project planners (both MoAFS & NGOs) should planners (both MoAFS & NGOs) should identify goals, decision criteria & the identify goals, decision criteria & the context of the decisions for women context of the decisions for women before project implementation.before project implementation.

6666

Future Research DirectionFuture Research Direction A similar study comparing views from all key A similar study comparing views from all key

stakeholders namely, SG2000 Prog Officials, Agric. stakeholders namely, SG2000 Prog Officials, Agric. Ext. staff of MoAFS, farm input dealers and Ext. staff of MoAFS, farm input dealers and farmers would greatly contribute to the available farmers would greatly contribute to the available literature on effectiveness of extension approaches.literature on effectiveness of extension approaches.

There is need for a study on the effectiveness of There is need for a study on the effectiveness of government/NGO collaboration in the delivery of government/NGO collaboration in the delivery of extension services.extension services.

It is also essential that expenditures in extension It is also essential that expenditures in extension should be followed by rigorous efforts to measure should be followed by rigorous efforts to measure the economic impact on farmers. A study to assess the economic impact on farmers. A study to assess the economic impact of the SG 2000 Prog. would the economic impact of the SG 2000 Prog. would be of great significance.be of great significance.

6767

Education

Masters Desertation Presentation 2008