The relationship between personal and farm characteristics and production efficiency

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

In Lesotho, a predominantly small scale farming country, the average yield for maize is about 0.5tons/ha whilst the national average in South Africa is 2.73 tons/ha all very much lower than in most parts of the world (FAO, 2005). There are indications that farmers in Lesotho can increase their yields by about 100% by adopting hybrid maize seeds and other yield enhancing technologies such as fertilizers and liming. According to the FAO (2005) whilst most small scale farmers in South Africa achieve yields of about 4 t/ha others in Kwazulu-Natal who apply recommended technologies under rain-fed conditions have consistently obtained yields in excess of 8 t/ha with yields of 11 t/ha on some selected fields (FAO, 2005).

The causes of the wide variation in productivity could be traced to climatic conditions where total annual precipitation and distribution is a factor and can hardly be controlled except by irrigation. While greater parts of the maize growing region in South Africa is less endowed with adequate water resources, Lesotho on the other hand is relatively well endowed with water resources yet lacks the infrastructure and resources to develop good irrigation systems. Soils in both countries are extremely vulnerable to various forms of degradation and have low resilience (recovery potential). Very little fertilizer is applied among small scale farmers, for various reasons, leading to exhaustive cropping and soil fertility decline. Because yields are low, the annual amounts of nutrients removed, are small, but the long term effects are large.

Maize crop is selected for this study due to its dominance on the farming scene of the two countries – Lesotho and South Africa. It is the most important grain crop, being both the major staple food for the majority of the population especially the poor, and a major feed grain. Maize serves as a raw material for the manufactured products such as paper, paint, textiles, medicines and food. The maize industry is important in the economy both as an employer and earner of foreign currency. It is expected that the demand for maize for animal feed will increase as the domestic poultry industry expands and the domestic demand may expand by approximately 30% in the medium term if the production of bio-ethanol from maize commenced. The selection of maize and the associated improved farm practices of seed and soil fertility enhancing innovations of lime and fertilizer application for the study domain is deliberate and purposive because of the potential effect these soil ameliorants can have on yields when adopted by farmers and consequently contribute to incomes and livelihoods.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The main research problem is the low productivity of small scale maize farmers largely as a result of low adoption rates of recommended practices that could enhance yield levels and improve their incomes and livelihoods, and the inability of extension workers to effectively influence farmers, decision making process by their lack of appropriate predictive extension planning tools. The problem faced by extension workers is the lack of understanding of the wants and needs of farmers, their preferences and behavioral inclinations towards agricultural innovations The situation of small scale farmers described in the background section has major implication for agricultural extension workers whose main function is to ensure that improved practices are applied (Mosher 1976; Rivera, 2011).

The inability of extension workers to influence farmers’ behaviors is problematic and the study is design to contribute to a better appreciation of farmers’ motive for adoption and establish a basis by which extension workers can predict upfront and plan appropriately to address the concerns of farmers. A number of studies have shown that the use of agricultural innovation by farmers results in significant improvements in yields and productivity on the farm through efficiency gains (Henderson & Gomes, 1982; Byerlee, Alex & Echeverria, 2002; Marsh, Pannell & Lidner, 2004). Consequently, many governments, particularly in developing countries have made investments in agricultural research and extension with the expectation that the adoption of agricultural innovations by farmers (Marsh, et al, 2004,) will lead to positive changes on the farm with beneficial impacts on the livelihoods of the farming population and the national gross domestic product (Henderson & Gomes, 1982; Byerlee et al, 2002). In Europe, on the other hand, the emphasis of extension programs in recent times has not been the same as in developing countries, but more towards environmental issues.

READ GEOGRAPHY OF SYRIO-PALESTINE

According to Burton (2004), policy makers in the 1980’s sought to dissuade farmers from over production through voluntary measures to diversify their businesses to reduce environmental impacts of agriculture. Issues in agriculture within the developed nations and less developed are not the same (Rivera, 2011) but the approach of communicating to farmers are largely similar – through extension program. Rivera (2011: 115) describes extension as the “engine of innovation”. Although the organizational structure and operational systems may differ from country to country, he argues that ‘the main challenge is for extension to operate in a context where new knowledge and technology, when appropriate, are applied’ (Rivera, 2011: 116). Extension organizations and the individuals who make up the organization have to contend with behavioral change of the users of the knowledge and technology in order to fulfill their mission of ensuring its application. Simply put, a technology or knowledge cannot be applied unless there is a behavioral change. Extension methodology around the globe therefore, has to contend with changing the behavior of farmers to improve the adoption of either a policy measure (in the case of Europe) or improved farm practices (in the case of developing countries).

Behavioral change is thus required to make any meaningful change on the farming scene and has therefore become a major concern for research. As Burton (2004: 359), noted: “The failure of such measures to induce widespread changes to the farming industry is one factor that has led to an increase in the importance of understanding individual response of individual actors to policy measures”. It is only through the utilization of new practices that policy changes or agricultural productivity can be measured and the objectives realized. Understanding how farmers decide or what motivates farmers to change their behaviors is therefore of primary interest to policy makers and development workers. To social scientists, the challenge is to provide answers to enable development workers prepare strategic intervention measures.

Table of Contents :

DECLARATION TO BE SIGNED BY THE STUDENT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
ABSTRACT
List of Tables
List of Figures
List of Abbreviations
CHAPTER
- INTRODUCTION
- 1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
- 1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
- 1.3 STUDY OBJECTIVES
- 1.4 HYPOTHESeS OF THE STUDY
- 1.5 RELEVANCE OF THE STUDY
- 1.6 OUTLINE OF THE REPORT
CHAPTER
- LITERATURE REVIEW
- 2.1 INTRODUCTION
- 2.2 FARMER AND FARM CHARACTRISTICS AND ADOPTION BEHAVIOR
- 2.3 THE ENVIRONMENT AND ADOPTION BEHAVIOR
- 2.4 INTERVENING VARIABLES AND ADOPTION BEHAVIOR
- 2.5 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE STUDY
- 2.6 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER
- METHODOLOGY
- 3.1 INTRODUCTION
- 3.2 THE STUDY AREA
- 3.3 RESEARCH DESIGN
- 3.4 VARIABLES AND THEIR MEASUREMENT
- 3.5 DEPENDENT VARIABLES
- 3.6 DATA ANALYSIS
CHAPTER
- THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERSONAL AND FARM CHARACTERISTICS AND PRODUCTION EFFICIENCY
- 4.1 INTRODUCTION
- 4.2 INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
- 4.3 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER
- THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INDEPENDENT, INTERVENING AND SUBJECTIVE NORM VARIABLES AND THE ADOPTION OF RECOMMENDED SEED PRACTICES
- 5.1 INTRODUCTION
- 5.2 INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
- 5.3 TOTAL INFLUENCE OF INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
- 5.4 RELATIONSHIP INTERVENING AND SUBJECTIVE NORM VARIABLES AND THE ADOPTION OF RECOMMENDED SEED PRACTICIES
- 5.5 TOTAL INFLUENCE OF INTERVENING VARIABLES
- 5.6 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER
- THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INDEPENDENT, INTERVENING AND SUBJECTIVE NORM VARIABLES and THE ADOPTION OF RECOMMENDED BASAL FERTILIZER PRACTICES
- 6.1 INTRODUCTION
- 6.2 INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
- 6.3 TOTAL INFLUENCE OF INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
- 6.4 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INTERVENING AND SUBJECTIVE NORM VARIABLES AND THE ADOPTION RECOMMENDED FERTILIZER PRACTICES
- 6.5 TOTAL INFLUENCE OF INTERVENING AND SUBJECTIVE NORM VARIABLES
- 6.6 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER
- THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INDEPENDENT, INTERVENING and subjective norm VARIABLES AND THE ADOPTION OF RECOMMENDED TOP DRESSING PRACTICES
- 7.1 INTRODUCTION
- 7.2 INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
- 7.3 TOTAL INFLUENCE OF INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
- 7.4 THE RELATIONSHIP SUBJECTIVE NORM AND THE ADOPTION OF RECOMMENDED TOP DRESSING FERTILIZER PRACTICES
- 7.5 TOTAL INFLUENCE OF INTERVENING AND SUBJECTIVE NORM VARIABLES
- 7.6 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER
- THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INDEPENDENT, INTERVENING AND SUBJECTIVE NORM VARIABLES AND THE ADOPTION OF RECOMMENDED LIME PRACTICES
- 8.1 INTRODUCTION
- 8.2 INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
- 8.3 TOTAL INFLUENCE OF INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
- 8.4 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN, SUBJECTIVE NORM VARIABLES and THE ADOPTION OF RECOMMENDED LIME PRACTICES
- 8.5 TOTAL INFLUENCE OF INTERVENING AND SUBJECTIVE NORM VARIABLES
- 8.6 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER
- SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
- 9.1 INTRODUCTION
- 9.2 CONCLUSION
- 9.3 RECOMMENDATIONS
- 9.4 FURTHER RESEARCH
- Literature Cited
- QUESTIONNAIRE