INTERPAKS, Examines the nature and extent of different extension services available to farmers in Punjab state (1974-5) as well as the impact of extension inputs on productivity in agriculture. The design of the study was multi-stage stratified random sampling with weights assigned to different items of extension input (mass media, visits by extension officers, visits to extension agencies, training). On the average, each farmer visited the extension agencies 5.8 times a year, was visited 9.42 times, only 22% of farmers received training, 28% purchased daily newspapers, 86% listened to radio programs for the rural population, and 68% visited the university. Production function analysis was conducted both with and without extension inputs. The regression coefficient of the extension input was found to be 0.18 which was significant at the 5% level.
INTERPAKS, Examines the level of significance of extension services and the marginal contribution of extension services to increased agricultural production in Gujarat State (1976-77). In addition, the marginal contributions of extension services are compared for the high and low productivity areas of the state. Results of the regression analysis indicate that extension investment has played a significant role in increasing agricultural production only in the high productivity areas while in the low productivity areas it has played an insignificant and even negative role.
9 pages, This study assessed crop farmers’ willingness to pay for AESs and identified factors influencing their willingness to pay for AESs. Data were collected from 292 randomly selected crop farmers’ households between December 2017 and February 2018 using a questionnaire through face-to-face interviews. Data were analyzed using frequency counts, percentages and Tobit regression model. The study found that 92% of the respondents are willing to pay for AESs. It was also found that farmer’s age, education attainment, farming experience, distance from farm to the nearest important road, income (both farm and nonfarm) and attitude towards AESs are significant determinants of farmers willingness to pay for AESs. The study recommends that these variables be given proper policy consideration by the government and other stakeholders in the design and the implementation of a workable fashion of privatizing extension services for the expected impact of improving extension services and farmers’ productivity hence improved quality of life.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 205 Document Number: D12540
Journal Title Details:
33
Notes:
8 pages, The term “feminization of agriculture” is used to describe changing labor markets that pull men out of agriculture, increasing women's roles. However, simplified understandings of this feminization persist as myths in the literature, limiting our understanding of the broader changes that affect food security. Through a review of literature, this paper analyses four myths: 1) feminization of agriculture is the predominant global trend in global agriculture; 2) women left behind are passive victims and not farmers; 3) feminization is bad for agriculture; and 4) women farmers all face similar challenges. The paper unravels each myth, reveals the complexity of gendered power dynamics in feminization trends, and discusses the implications of these for global food security.
