1 - 3 of 3
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. Do agricultural extension services promote adoption of soil and water conservation practices? evidence from northern Ghana
- Collection:
- Agricultural Communications Documentation Center (ACDC)
- Contributers:
- Danso-Abbeam, Gideon (author)
- Format:
- Journal article
- Publication Date:
- 2022-09-06
- Published:
- Netherlands: Elsevier B.V.
- Location:
- Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 206 Document Number: D12801
- Journal Title:
- Journal of Agriculture and Food Research
- Journal Title Details:
- Vol. 10
- Notes:
- 10 pages, Agricultural environment in many developing economies has become increasingly unpredictable in recent decades as a result of climate change, increasing the risk of crop failure. Access to meaningful information is required to mitigate the negative effects of the changing environment. This study examined the impact of agricultural extension services on the adoption of soil and water conservation (SWC) practices using data obtained from farming households in Northern Ghana. A multivariate probit model was used to assess the simultaneous or/and substitution adoption of SWC practices, while endogenous switching probit (ESP) was used to estimate the impact of extension services on adoption of SWC practices to account for observed and unobserved heterogeneities. The results showed that most of the SWC practices were adopted jointly, and factors such as non-farm economic activites and farm size influence the adoption of SWC practices. Moreover, farmers who accessed agricultural extension services had a higher probability of adopting most of the SWC practices (crop rotation, contour ploughing and manure application), and those who did not benefit from extension services would have had an equally higher likelihood of adopting the SWC practices had they accessed the services. The findings of the study imply that enhancing agricultural extension services will reduce adoption gaps in SWC practices, and consequently reduce farmers’ exposure to climate-related agricultural production risks. With growing information and communication technologies, pluralistic extension service delivery that mixes governmental and private-sector-led approaches to extension operations to foster demand-driven extension delivery services are highly recommended.
3. Understanding barriers and opportunities for adoption of conservation practices on rented farmland in the US
- Collection:
- Agricultural Communications Documentation Center (ACDC)
- Contributers:
- Ranjan, Pranay (author), Wardroppe, Chloe B. (author), Eanes, Francis R. (author), Reddy, Sheila M. W. (author), Harden, Seth C. (author), Masuda, Yuta J. (author), and Prokopy, Linda S. (author)
- Format:
- Online journal article
- Publication Date:
- 2019-01
- Published:
- USA: Science Direct
- Location:
- Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 8 Document Number: D10297
- Journal Title:
- Land Use Policy
- Journal Title Details:
- 80 : 214-223
- Notes:
- 10 pages., Via online journal., Agricultural conservation programs often focus on farm operators when promoting conservation practices. However, much of U.S. farmland is owned by landowners not directly involved in farm operations. Rental arrangements on these lands can dis-incentivize the adoption of conservation practices that could improve soil health, water quality, and land values. To date, agricultural conservation policy has largely ignored the role of non-operating landowners (NOLs) and rental arrangements. We help improve the evidence-base for policy by identifying barriers to adoption of conservation practices on rented farmlands. Analysis of forty interviews with NOLs, operators, farm managers and university extension personnel in Iowa, Illinois, and Indiana revealed five categories of barriers: cash rent lease terms, rental market dynamics, information deficits/asymmetries, cognitive/interpersonal, and financial motivations. Some barriers, such as risk aversion and farm aesthetics were expressed by both NOLs and operators, while other barriers, such as status quo bias and annual renewal of leases were only expressed by NOLs and operators, respectively. To overcome barriers to conservation, interviewees recommended improving communication between NOLs and operators and modifying cash rent lease terms in order to build in flexibility for equitable sharing of risks and rewards. Agricultural conservation programs could readily apply these results—possibly working with intermediaries (e.g., farm managers, lawyers)—to offer communication and lease tools and assistance to NOLS and operators. Future research should evaluate the efficacy of these conservation interventions and how intermediaries affect the balance of power between NOLs and operators.