12 pages., In sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), declining soil fertility is among the factors affecting optimal food production. Although a number of interventions have been implemented to improve soil fertility management (SFM) in SSA, their adoption especially among small scale farmers has been low. Although the literature provides considerable evidence of socio-economic factors which influence adoption, the subject of how communication influences adoption of SFM remains under-explored. This paper therefore reviewed studies on SFM communication in SSA. The objectives were to identify the current focus of studies on SFM communication, the current definitions of communication which informed such studies, and the type of SFM practices being communicated in the SSA region. Using specific search terms, articles were collected from various databases and content analysed. The review revealed five main themes as the focus of current studies on SFM. The study also revealed two main interpretations of communication which in turn influence the use of either diffusion or participatory communication strategies for SFM communication. The review also showed a focus on integrated soil fertility management (ISFM) messages in the SSA area. The study concludes that while each of the two communication strategies has their individual strengths, farmers prefer participatory strategies. This is because participatory strategies foster interaction and greater understanding; thereby, increasing the likelihood of farmer adoption of SFM practices in SSA. The review concludes by calling for further research on the use of participatory communication to engage farmers about various SFM practices in SSA.
Babu, V.K. (author), Singh, Y.P. (author), and Department of Agriculture Extension, R.B.S. College, Bichpuri, Agra; Department of Agriculture Extension, R.B.S. College, Bichpuri, Agra
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
unknown
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 45 Document Number: B05520
November issue., Article investigated two examples of group extension for knowledge exchange and innovation among farmers, discussions within the Beef Technology Adoption Programme (BTAP) in Ireland and monitor farms in Scotland.
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.
33 pages, This study surveyed 258 organic grain farmers in Iowa in the U.S. Midwest. We identified seven areas of challenges related to organic grain farming adoption: organic farming operations, marketing, policy, finance, inputs and information, social pressures, and land tenure. Respondents reported three key areas where extension programs were needed: education, research, and technical services. Regarding outreach formats, organic farmers preferred events where peers were featured or provided leadership, such as field days, one-on-one mentor programs, and farmer-to-farmer workshops. Results provided empirical evidence to support theoretical discussions and policy implications on issues related to adoption of organic grain farming.
