Effectiveness of group contact methods in diffusion of agricultural technologies among the farming community

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/12/2013
Views (594)
current_issue_feature_image
publication_file

Effectiveness of group contact methods in diffusion of agricultural technologies among the farming community

A. Khatam, S. Muhammad, I. Ashraf, A.K.M.K. Pervez
J. Biodiv. & Environ. Sci. 3(12), 264-268, December 2013.
Copyright Statement: Copyright 2013; The Author(s).
License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Abstract

The present study was conducted in 2010 to examine the effectiveness of group contact methods in diffusion of agricultural technologies among the farming community of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. For this purpose, seven districts of the central region of the province were selected. Data were collected from 280 randomly selected farmers through “survey” method with the help of a pre-tested interview schedule and were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The results of the study show that main group extension methods through which the farmers got sources of agricultural information were demonstrations, group discussions, field days and lectures of extension field staff. However, demonstrations were perceived to be the most effective method for dissemination of agricultural technologies with mean value 2.91 followed by group discussions and field days which were ranked 2nd and 3rd with mean values 2.58 and 2.33, respectively. A good number (46.07%) of respondents never visited agricultural demonstrations, whereas, 26.07% respondents occasionally visited these demonstrations while, 20.36% respondents rarely visited demonstrations. Only a small number of respondents (7.5%) regularly visited demonstrations laid out in the study area. Most (45.36%) of the respondents never participated in group discussions regarding latest agricultural technologies although, a good number of respondents (32.85%) rarely participated in group discussions, and 16.43% respondents took part in such discussions occasionally whereas, only a fraction of the respondents (5.36%) regularly participated in group discussions. Quite a few respondents (37.50%) rarely attended field days for latest agricultural technologies, 34.64% respondents occasionally attended, 18.57% never attended field days whereas, 9.29% respondents regularly attended field days organized in the area. Most of the respondents (40.36%) never attended lectures of extension field staff regarding agricultural technologies, 25.36% rarely attended such lectures, and 23.21% occasionally attended the lectures. Only a small number (11.07%) of respondents regularly attended the lectures of extension field staff.

Abbas M, Lodhi TE, Bashir A, Ather M. 2008. Dissemination of wheat production technology and interface of out-reach efforts with farmers. Journal of Agricultural Research 46 (1).

Amudavi DM, Khan ZR, Wanyama JM, Midega CAO, Pittchar J, Nyangau IM, Hassanali A, Pickett JA. .2009. Assessment of Technical Efficiency of Farmer Teachers in the Uptake and Dissemination of Push–Pull Technology in Western Kenya. In: Crop Protection 28 (11) 987-996.

Behrens JH, Evans JF. 1984. Using mass media for extension teaching. In: Swanson, B.E. (ed.), Agricultural Extension: A Reference Manual, p. 144-155. FAO, Rome, Italy

Farooq A, Ishaq M. 2005. Devolving the farm extension system. “Daily Dawn” 19 Dec, 2005. (Online ed.)

Farooq S, Muhammad S. Chaudhary KM, Ashraf I. 2007. Role of print media in the dissemination of agricultural information among farmers. Pakistan Journal Agricultural Science. 44 (2) 378-380.

Fitzgibbon TC, Morris LL 1987. How to design a programme evaluation. Newburry Park CA: Sage.

Khan A, Pervaiz U, Khan N M, Ahmad S, Nigar S. 2009. Effectiveness of demonstration on plots as extension method adopted by AKRSP for agricultural technology dissemination in district Chitral. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture 25(2) 313-319.

Khan SR A 2004. Wheat Production Scenario. Daily Dawn, Jan 12: 3.

Khan ZR, Amudavi DM Midega CAO, Wanyama JM, Pickett JA 2008. Farmers’ Perceptions of a ‘Push–Pull’ Technology for Control of Cereal Stem Borers and Striga Weed in Western Kenya. In: Crop protection 27 (6) 976-987.

Kerkhof P 1990. Agroforestry in Africa: A survey of project experience. London: Panos Institute

Muhammad SC, Asghar M, Chaudhry KM, Khan SA. 1990. An evaluation into extension teaching methods used for the adoption of recommended water management practices. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Science 27: (2) 102–105.

Muhammad S and Garfoth C. 1995. Farmer’s information exposure and its impact on their adoption behaviour. Pakistan Journalof Agricultural Science, 32 262–5.

Rahman M 2006. Livestock farmer field school (LFFS) in CBRM: pioneering in Pakistan. Annual report ICI-Pakistan.

Related Articles

Agroforestry in woody-encroached Sub-Saharan savannas: Transforming ecological challenges into sustainable opportunities

Yao Anicet Gervais Kouamé, Pabo Quévin Oula, Kouamé Fulgence Koffi, Ollo Sib, Adama Bakayoko, Karidia Traoré, J. Biodiv. & Environ. Sci. 27(3), 10-22, September 2025.

Extreme rainfall variability and trends in the district of Ouedeme, municipality of Glazoue (Benin)

Koumassi Dègla Hervé, J. Biodiv. & Environ. Sci. 27(3), 1-9, September 2025.

Heterosis breeding, general and specific combining ability and stability studies in pearl millet: Current trends

Ram Avtar, Krishan Pal, Kavita Rani, Rohit Kumar Tiwari, Mahendra Kumar Yadav, J. Biodiv. & Environ. Sci. 27(2), 117-124, August 2025.

Combining ability, heterosis and stability for yield and fibre quality traits in cotton: Breeding approaches and future prospects

Rohit Kumar Tiwari, Krishan Pal, R. P. Saharan, Ram Avtar, Mahendra Kumar Yadav, J. Biodiv. & Environ. Sci. 27(2), 109-116, August 2025.

Bridging the COPD awareness gap in marginalized populations: Findings from a multicentre study in Khalilabad, Sant Kabir Nagar, Uttar Pradesh, India

Anupam Pati Tripathi, Jigyasa Pandey, Sakshi Singh, Smita Pathak, Dinesh Chaudhary, Alfiya Mashii, Farheen Fatima, J. Biodiv. & Environ. Sci. 27(2), 97-108, August 2025.

Antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activity of Pleurotus citrinopileatus Singer and Pleurotus sajor-caju (Fr.) Singer

P. Maheswari, P. Madhanraj, V. Ambikapathy, P. Prakash, A. Panneerselvam, J. Biodiv. & Environ. Sci. 27(2), 90-96, August 2025.

Mangrove abundance, diversity, and productivity in effluent-rich estuarine portion of Butuanon River, Mandaue City, Cebu

John Michael B. Genterolizo, Miguelito A. Ruelan, Laarlyn N. Abalos, Kathleen Kay M. Buendia, J. Biodiv. & Environ. Sci. 27(2), 77-89, August 2025.

Cytogenetic and pathological investigations in maize × teosinte hybrids: Chromosome behaviour, spore identification, and inheritance of maydis leaf blight resistance

Krishan Pal, Ravi Kishan Soni, Devraj, Rohit Kumar Tiwari, Ram Avtar, J. Biodiv. & Environ. Sci. 27(2), 70-76, August 2025.