Impact of agricultural extension service on adoption of chemical fertilizer: Implications for rice productivity and development in Ghana

Donkor, Emmanuel; Owusu‐Sekyere, Enoch; Owusu, Victor; Jordaan, Henry

doi:10.1016/j.njas.2016.10.002

Cited by 143 publications

(114 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, the majority of the farmers were able to decide for insecticide application when larval stages were at early (smaller) this mean farmers were aware on when to apply insecticides. The present survey is agreement with Mohammadrezaei & Hayati (2015); Lukuyu et al (2012); Benjamin (2013); Baloch & Thapa (2016) and Emmanuel et al (2016) who believed that agricultural extension services are the main diffusion technology instruments which impacts on farmers' knowledge and skills as well as on production. Daniel et al (2011) reported that training in pest epidemiology and crop management improved farmers' knowledge and led to better understanding of the pest epidemiology, so that the incidence of pests declined and cocoa yields increased by an average of 30%.…”

Section: Insectsupporting

confidence: 91%

Farmers Status, Knowledge & Management Practices on Major Chickpea Insect Pests in Some Selected Zones of Ethiopia

Fite¹,

Tefera²,

Negeri³

et al. 2018

JAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Survey were undertaken in five zones of Oromiya and Amhara regional states, Ethiopia from February to March 2018 to investigate farmers’ status, knowledge, major chickpea production constraints and insect pest management practices of chickpea. The survey involved 293 randomly taken farmers, who are interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire. Chickpea insect pests were considered as the main, among production constraints of chickpea by most of the interviewed farmers in Ethiopia. The majority of the farmers’ responded that Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) is the most prevalent insect pests of chickpea under field condition and Callosobruchus chinensis (L.) (Coleoptera: Bruchidae) in storage. Development Agents (DAs) were the top pest advisory service providers in the current study. A conventional insecticide (namely; Lambda-cyhalotrin and Dimethoate) for the control of H. armigera was the most commonly used pest management methods. Moreover, Two times insecticide applications per cropping season were the most frequent, deployed by most of the interviewed farmers followed by cultural pest management practices. Use of biological control and resistant chickpea varieties against major insect pests were low to negligible in the current survey study in the area. The majority of the farmers began control decision when H. armigera larval stages were smaller and they did not consider larval number per chickpea plant for the decision. These results will be used to formulate future effective and sustainable integrated pest management (IPM) in chickpea for Ethiopian farmers emphasizing ecologically and economically-based approaches.

show abstract

Section: Insectsupporting

confidence: 91%

Farmers Status, Knowledge & Management Practices on Major Chickpea Insect Pests in Some Selected Zones of Ethiopia

Fite¹,

Tefera²,

Negeri³

et al. 2018

JAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For the promotion of modern technologies and good agricultural practices, well-functioning and accessible extension services are imperative (Emmanuel et al 2016). However, in reality, extension services in SSA are often understaffed, underequipped and often lack the relevant knowledge on, for instance, weed management (e.g.…”

Section: The Status Quo Of Herbicides In Africamentioning

confidence: 99%

Status quo of chemical weed control in rice in sub-Saharan Africa

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

If future rice production is to contribute to food security for the increasing population of sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), effective strategies are needed to control weeds, the crop's fiercest competitors for resources. To gain better insights into farmers' access to, and use of, herbicides as part of weed control strategies, surveys were conducted in key rice production locations across SSA. Farm surveys were held among 1965 farmers across 20 countries to collect data on rice yields, farmer's weed management practices, herbicide use, frequencies of interventions and information sources regarding herbicides. Markets were surveyed across 17 countries to collect data on herbicide availability, brand names and local prices (converted to US$ ha −1 ). Herbicides are used by 34% of the rice farmers in SSA, but adoption ranges from 0 to 72% across countries. Herbicides are more often used by men (40%) than by women (27%) and more often in irrigated (44% of farmers) than in rainfed lowland (36%) or upland rice growing environments (24%). Herbicides are always used supplementary to hand weeding. Following this combination, yield loss reductions in irrigated lowlands and rainfed uplands are estimated to be 0.4 t ha −1 higher than hand weeding alone. In rainfed lowlands no benefits were observed from herbicide use. Sixty-two percent of the herbicides sold at rural agro-chemical supply markets are unauthorized. These markets are dominated by glyphosate and 2,4-D, sold under 55 and 41 different brand names, respectively, and at relatively competitive prices (below average herbicide price of US $17 ha −1 ). They are also the most popular herbicides among farmers. For advice on herbicide application methods, farmers primarily rely on their peers, and only a few receive advice from extension services (<23%) or inform themselves by reading the product label (<16%). Herbicide application timings are therefore often (38%) sub-optimal. Herbicide technologies can contribute to reduced production losses in rice in SSA. However, through negative effects on crop, environment and human health, incorrect herbicide use may unintentionally counteract efforts to increase food security. Moving away from this status quo will require strict implementation and monitoring of national pesticide regulations and investment in research and development to innovate and diversify the currently followed weed management strategies, agricultural service provision and communications with farmers.

show abstract

“…Access to extension was also found to improve productivity of value adders in the study. This follows productivity literature where extension services led to the dissemination of information that may be productivity-increasing for the farmers [66].…”

Section: Productivity Impact Of Value Addition Across Cassava Productmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Moreover, the coefficient of access to extension was negative and significant in determining the productivity of the farmers. In their study, [66] found that the impact of extension on productivity came through farmers adopting the improved technology brought by extension. Hence, the negative effect of extension on productivity of the non-value adders may be suggestive of the decision not to add value in spite of possible contact with extension.…”

Section: Productivity Impact Of Value Addition Across Cassava Productmentioning

confidence: 99%

Value Addition and Productivity Differentials in the Nigerian Cassava System

Adeyemo

Okoruwa

2018

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an increasing need to improve value addition in order to get maximum utility from agricultural systems. Using a retrospective panel data from 482 cassava farmers covering the years 2015–2017, this study examined the effect of value addition on productivity of farmers in the cassava system in Nigeria. We analysed a non-parametric Data Envelopment Analysis to examine productivity across cassava production systems over the three year period. We also examined the impact of value addition on productivity using an endogenous switching regression to account for unobservables that determine the decision to add value and productivity of the farmers. The study found that cost and revenue outlays increased with value addition. Cassava farmers in general operated below the efficiency frontier, with total productivity declining over the 2015–2017 period. However, higher value addition farmers had better efficiency and non-reducing productivity in the periods studied. We found evidence of selection bias in the decision to add value and productivity of the farmers. The conditional and unconditional outcome estimates revealed positive gains in productivity with value addition, confirming the hypothesis that value addition increases farming households’ productivity. We recommend that essential services such as extension services, agricultural training, and ease of enterprise registration that drive agricultural value addition be made available to farmers.

show abstract

Impact of agricultural extension service on adoption of chemical fertilizer: Implications for rice productivity and development in Ghana

Cited by 143 publications

References 24 publications

Farmers Status, Knowledge & Management Practices on Major Chickpea Insect Pests in Some Selected Zones of Ethiopia

Farmers Status, Knowledge & Management Practices on Major Chickpea Insect Pests in Some Selected Zones of Ethiopia

Status quo of chemical weed control in rice in sub-Saharan Africa

Value Addition and Productivity Differentials in the Nigerian Cassava System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About