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.
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.
Andre, Pamela Q. J. (author / Associate Director for Automation, National Agricultural Library, U.S. Department of Agriculture) and Associate Director for Automation, National Agricultural Library, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
1990-10
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 81 Document Number: C04829
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.
