7 pages., Agricultural information sources play a pragmatic role in knowledge building among the farming community. Farmers use various traditional and modern information sources such as extension field staff, fellow farmers, private sector, electronic media, print media, and information communication technologies (ICTs) gadgets to get the latest information necessary for agricultural productivity. This study aimed to explore the patterns of farmers to access and receive information from different sources. A well-structured and expert reviewed interview schedule was used to collect data from farmers from Huailai county. A total of 122 interviews were conducted for the collection of data. Data were recorded using EpiData software program and a logistic regression model was applied using the computer-based statistical program “STATA”. The findings indicate that media (electronic media and print media) was the key information source for the farmers and 40.16% of farmers accessed media particularly for agricultural information whereas 34.43% used agricultural extension field staff (government) to acquire agricultural information. The government of China should start some educational interventions for farmers to improve their educational level so that the farming community could utilize multiple information sources for crop productivity.
Mirani, Zaheeruddin, Mirani (author / Sindh Agriculture Univeristy), Leske, Gary W. (author / University of Minnesota), and Labano, Ali Hassan (author)
Format:
Proceedings
Publication Date:
2001-04-04
Published:
Pakistan: Association for International Agricultural and Extension Education
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 138 Document Number: C20934
Notes:
Burton Swanson Collection, pages 247-254, from "Emerging trends in agricultural and extension education", AIAEE 2001, Proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference, April 4-7, 2001, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA
Telg, Ricky W. (author), Irani, Tracy A. (author), Place, Nick T. (author), Kistler, Mark J. (author), and Association for International Agricultural and Extension Education (AIAEE).
Format:
Paper
Publication Date:
2006-05-14
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 150 Document Number: C24189
Notes:
Retrieved June 17, 2006, Pages 371-379 in proceedings of the AIAEE conference in Clearwater Beach, Florida, May 14-17, 2006.
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 147 Document Number: C23522
Notes:
In the e-book, E.Gelb and A. Offer (eds.), ICT in Agriculture: perspectives of technological innovation. Center for Agricultural Economic Research, Hebrew University of Jerusalem. 14 pages.
Coggins, Sam (author), McCampbell, Mariette (author), Sharma, Akriti (author), Sharma, Rama (author), Haefele, Stephen (author), Karki, Emma (author), Hetherington, Jack (author), Smith, Jeremy (author), and Brown, Brendan (author)
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2022-03-01
Published:
United States: Elsevier
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 204 Document Number: D12486
10 pages, Digital extension tools (DETs) include phone calls, WhatsApp groups and specialised smartphone applications used for agricultural knowledge brokering. We researched processes through which DETs have (and have not) been used by farmers and other extension actors in low- and middle-income countries. We interviewed 40 DET developers across 21 countries and 101 DET users in Bihar, India. We found DET use is commonly constrained by fifteen pitfalls (unawareness of DET, inaccessible device, inaccessible electricity, inaccessible mobile network, insensitive to digital illiteracy, insensitive to illiteracy, unfamiliar language, slow to access, hard to interpret, unengaging, insensitive to user's knowledge, insensitive to priorities, insensitive to socio-economic constraints, irrelevant to farm, distrust). These pitfalls partially explain why women, less educated and less wealthy farmers often use DETs less, as well as why user-driven DETs (e.g. phone calls and chat apps) are often used more than externally-driven DETs (e.g. specialised smartphone apps). Our second key finding was that users often made - not just found - DETs useful for themselves and others. This suggests the word ‘appropriation’ conceptualises DET use more accurately and helpfully than the word ‘adoption’. Our final key finding was that developers and users advocated almost ubiquitously for involving desired users in DET provision. We synthesise these findings in a one-page framework to help funders and developers facilitate more useable, useful and positively impactful DETs. Overall, we conclude developers increase DET use by recognizing users as fellow developers – either through collaborative design or by designing adaptable DETs that create room for user innovation.
Brodt, Sonja B. (author), Klonsky, Karen (author), Tourte, Laura (author), Duncan, Roger (author), Hendricks, Lonnie (author), Ohmart, Cliff (author), and Verdegaal, Paul (author)
Format:
Research paper
Publication Date:
2004-12
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 147 Document Number: C23445
The authors consider the adoption of biologically integrated agricultural practices from the perspective of farm management style. Adoption decisions for farming practices must fit into a broader farm decision-making context that incorporates economic, environmental, social, family and personal considerations, as well as use of agricultural information sources. Drawing from a study of California almond and winegrape growers, the authors demonstrate that management styles differ substantially among farmers and that these differences affect use of information sources and adoption of biologically based practices on the farm. A two-season mail survey of farming practices and information sources demonstrated that differences in management styles affect the adoption of practices.
