13 pages., Article #: 3FEA2, via online journal., A multiple indicators, multiple causes, or MIMIC, modeling framework can be used for analyzing a variety of farmer decision-making situations where multiple outcomes are possible. Example applications include analyses of farmer use of multiple information sources, management practices, or technologies. We applied the framework to analyze use of multiple information sources by beef cattle farmers. We provide measures of how farmer demographics, farm characteristics, and risk attitudes influenced farmer use of information from Extension, producer groups, popular press, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Internet, and other farmers. Education and greater willingness to take risk positively influenced information use among the farmers we studied. Our process has implications for broader use within Extension.
9 pages, In agricultural research for development adoption of new technology tends to be cast in categories: adoption, partial adoption, dis-adoption or non-adoption. While these may serve for pragmatic classification and measures for project success or impact they fail to properly acknowledge the ongoing and independent efforts of farmers (and others) in experimentation and integration of knowledge across a range of sources. This paper explores responses to practices for cattle management introduced during a research project, at project close, and five years after the project has finished. We consider the perceptions and application of new knowledge by farmers, extension staff, and policy makers. By taking a longer-term view, we demonstrate how farming households adapt and integrate knowledge from different sources into their daily practice, influenced by local institutions and changing cultural expectations, as well as external researchers. We also consider the influence of changing government priorities and incentives in steering farm-management decisions. Results suggest that a focus on measures to build capacity and empower farmers with information to adapt and respond to change, regardless of project activities, is a much more important goal and indicator of impact than measuring adoption.
14 pages., via online journal, The study evaluated the potential of 19 radio stations to promote new or improved agricultural technologies to strengthen agricultural extension services. Key informant interviews were conducted with the station and/or program managers of the selected radio stations. Two female respondents i.e. from UBC Radio, and Impact FM and 17 male respondents from the remaining radio stations were interviewed. The survey used semi structured questionnaire to determine broadcasting languages, radio transmitter capacity, geographical coverage and audience, major programs and scheduling, use of modern ICT, staff capacity and feedback mechanism from the audience as well as experience in agricultural programming using participatory radio campaign. The collected data was analyzed using content analysis. 16 of the radio stations are commercial while the remaining three belong to public, community and religious radio stations. The potential audience of the surveyed radio stations varied from one to ten million. Seven broadcasting languages (English, Luganda, Lugisu, Lusoga, Japadhola, Ateso and Samia) were predominant, while English and Luganda cut across all communities. The estimated number of audience for each radio station varies from one to ten million listeners. The results also indicate that agricultural programs are not a major component of radio program with time allocation for agrictural programs comprising only 15 percent of total time allocation. However, ten radio stations had previous collaboration with international, regional or national NGOs to promote specific agricultural technology. Radio broadcasters of these radio stations had some form of agricultural programming including participatory radio campaign. Building on this experience, it is possible to reach more farmers through radio to strengthen adoption of recommended agricultural technologies.
Whitacre, Brian (author / Oklahoma State University)
Format:
Presentation
Publication Date:
2018
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 8 Document Number: D10312
Notes:
32 pages., From the website, proceed to "agenda" link., PowerPoint presentation for the Federal Reserve Annual Agriculture Conference, Chicago, Illinois, November 7, 2018., Addresses the concept of "broadband," the rural-urban digital divide, broadband across the Midwest, academic research in rural broadband, and current federal/state policy.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 123 Document Number: D11184
Notes:
Online via AgriMarketing Weekly. 2 pages., "A new poll reports awareness and interest in technology-driven foods but reveals the need for transparency and education to remove fears and potentially drive adoption."
Brown, Brendan (author), Nuberg, Ian (author), Llewellyn, Rick (author), and School of Agriculture, Food and Wine, The University of Adelaide
CSIRO Agriculture
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2018
Published:
Elsevier
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 16 Document Number: D10460
10 pages., Via online journal., Conservation Agriculture (CA) is a knowledge-intensive set of practices which requires substantial access to functional agricultural extension services to enable utilisation. Despite this importance, the perspectives of those providing extension services to smallholder farmers have not been fully investigated. To address this, we qualitatively explore the perspectives of agricultural extension providers across six African countries to understand why uptake of CA has been limited, as well as the institutional changes that may be required to facilitate greater utilisation. Across the diversity of geographical, political and institutional contexts between countries, we find multiple commonalities in the constrained utilisation of CA by smallholder farmers, highlighting the difficulties non-mechanised subsistence farmers face in transitioning to market-oriented farming systems such as CA. The primary constraint relates to the economic viability of market-oriented farming where farmers remain in low input and low output systems with limited exit points. The assumed exit point used by CA programs appears to have led to a culture of financial expectancy and reflects a continuation of top-down extension approaches with inadequate modification of CA to the contextual realities of subsistence farmers. If African agricultural systems are to be sustainably intensified, we find a need for greater flexibility within extension systems in the pursuit of sustainable intensification. If extension systems are to persist with CA, it will need to be promoted through more transitional pathways that disaggregate the CA package, and with that there is a need for the provision of a mandate to, and necessary funding for, more participatory extension services.
