Swan, Sam (author / University of Minnesota, St. Paul), Camp, Linda (author / University of Minnesota, St. Paul), and Anderson, Neil (author / University of Minnesota, St. Paul)
Format:
Report
Publication Date:
unknown
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 145 Document Number: C22697
6 pages, Despite the huge potential for milk production, interventions to improve productivity in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) are barely based on specified farm classifications. This study aimed to develop robust and context-specific farm typologies to guide content of extension farm advice/services in Uganda. From a sample of 482 dairy farmers, we collected data on farmer socio-demographics, farm management practices, ownership of farm tools and facilities, willingness to pay for extension services, milk production, and marketing. Farm typologies were obtained based on principal component and cluster analyses. Thereby, of the three dairy production systems that emerged, small-scale, largely subsistence yet extensive and low productive farms were more prominent (82.6%). Farms that were classified as large-scale, less commercialized yet extensive with modest productive systems were more than the medium-scale commercial farms with intensive and highly productive systems. However, the later were considered to potentially transform dairy farming in Uganda. It was also predicted that the validity of our farm classification may persist until half of the farms have moved between clusters. The study gives new insights on dairy production systems in Uganda, which can be used to organize more targeted research on farmers’ extension needs for facilitating delivery of relevant and effective extension services and designing appropriate extension policies
4 pages., Article # 6COM1, via online journal., To develop more inclusive programs, Extension professionals should attend to self-awareness, communication, and program structure. We suggest engaging in reflection and examining word choices and program decisions to make programs more welcoming to all members of the communities we serve. Extension professionals should incorporate these practices in their work to meet the needs of increasingly diverse communities.
4 pages., Online from publisher., "For the first time, a landmark report on digitalisation for agriculture (D4Ag) in Africa compiles and highlights data on digital solutions that are enabling the transformation of African agriculture."
17 Pages., Given the marked heterogeneous conditions in smallholder agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa, there is a growing policy interest in site-specific extension advice and the use of digital extension tools to provide site-specific information. Empirical ex-ante studies on the design of digital extension tools and their use are rare. Using data from a choice experiment in Nigeria, we elicit and analyze the preferences of extension agents for major design features of ICT-enabled decision support tools (DSTs) aimed at site-specific nutrient management extension advice. We estimate different models, including mixed logit, latent class and attribute non-attendance models. We find that extension agents are generally willing to use such DSTs and prefer a DST with a more user-friendly interface that requires less time to generate results. We also find that preferences are heterogeneous: some extension agents care more about the effectiveness-related features of DSTs, such as information accuracy and level of detail, while others prioritise practical features, such as tool platform, language and interface ease-of-use. Recognising and accommodating such preference differences may facilitate the adoption of DSTs by extension agents and thus enhance the scope for such tools to impact the agricultural production decisions of farmers.
11pgs, Taylor and Francis Online, The field of research on agricultural and rural extension and education, also referred to as advisory services and intermediaries, has always engaged with different aspects of the spaces in which agricultural producers (farmers, growers, ranchers) are situated and operate. In this editorial, I will reflect on the elements and environments which jointly constitute and shape the farm (Darnhofer 2020) and their connection with extension and advisory services in the digital age, opening up new digital and virtual spaces. Extension and advisory services receive ample consideration in current debates on digitalization and digital transformation of the agrifood sector, and are an important focus of attention for agriculture and food systems research, practice and policy (Ehlers, Huber, and Finger 2021; Ingram and Maye 2020; Klerkx 2020). In what follows, I will elaborate on some digital and virtual spaces as sites of extension and advisory services research, to progress the field of study for which The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension serves as a publication outlet.
21 pages, Despite decades of investment in agricultural extension, technology adoption among farmers and agricultural productivity growth in Sub-Saharan Africa remain slow. Among other shortcomings, extension systems often make recommendations that do not account for price risk or spatial heterogeneity in farmers' growing conditions. However, little is known about the effectiveness of extension approaches for nutrient management that consider these issues. We analyze the impact of farmers' access to site-specific nutrient management recommendations and to information on expected returns, provided through a digital decision support tool, for maize production. We implement a randomized controlled trial among smallholders in the maize belt of northern Nigeria. We use three waves of annual panel data to estimate immediate and longer term effects of two different extension treatments: site-specific recommendations with and without complementary information about variability in output prices and expected returns. We find that site-specific nutrient management recommendations improve fertilizer management practices and maize yields but do not necessarily increase fertilizer use. In addition, we find that recommendations that are accompanied by additional information about variability in expected returns induce larger fertilizer investments that persist beyond the first year. However, the magnitudes of these effects are small: we find only incremental increases in investments and net revenues over two treatment years.
