Session 6.3 influence of extension methods and approaches in zambia
-
Upload
world-agroforestry-centre -
Category
Education
-
view
154 -
download
1
description
Transcript of Session 6.3 influence of extension methods and approaches in zambia
Influence of extension methods and approaches on
adoption of agroforestry practices in Zambia
Gillian Kabwe, Hugh Bigsby, Ross Cullen
Presented at the World Congress of Agroforestry
10-14 February, 2014
Outline of presentation
Background Methods of data collection and analysis Key findings Conclusions
Background Agroforestry technologies have potential to
address smallholder farmer challenges(Sanchez, 1995; Cooper et al., 1996; Kang & Akinnifesi, 2000; Franzel et al.,
2001; Garrity, 2006; Race, 2009) Low land productivity Low crop yields inadequate fodder for domestic animal feed Insecure household energy Lack of cash to meet basic needs
Trialling has been found to low; those adopting often make this part of their operation
Trialling and adoption of agroforestry Agroforestry technologies (%)
Improved
fallow Biomass transfer Woodlots
Fodder banks
Indigenous fruits
a. Within the overall sample
Never trialled 55.2 78.6 96.9 96.1 95.6 Trialled 44.9 21.4 3.1 3.9 4.4 b. Within the group who
trialled a technology Adopted 73.6 89.2 91.7 80 82.4 Stopped 26.4 10.8 8.3 20 17.6 (n=174)* (n=83)* (n=12)* (n=15*) (n=17)*
Study methods
Multi-stage sampling for selecting farmers
Purposeful sampling of districts and agricultural camps
Eight (8) agricultural camps from four (4) districts:
Chadzombe and Kumadzi (Chadiza)
Feni and Kapita (Chipata)
Chilembwe and Mwanamphangwe (Katete)
Chataika and Mondola (Petauke)
Random sampling of households
388 farm families: 57 percent male and 43 percent females
Analysis of the data Adoption measurement at 2 levels
Trialing Adoption (continued use)
Statistical tools employed Descriptive statistics Chi-square tests of independence Logistic regression analysis ANOVA
Results
Information sources[93 percent of farmers (N = 388) were aware of agroforestry]
Training in agroforestry
Extension approaches (bars represents standard errors of the means according
to Bonferroni test, LSD = 0.1814)
Extension agents(bars represents standard errors of the means according to Bonferroni test, LSD = 0.1814)
0 1 2 3 4 5
Farmer researcher
Village headman
Researchers
Farmer trainer
Farmer group
Neighbours
Extended family
Camp officer
Own family
Ex
ten
sio
n a
ge
nts
Mean scores
Mean score ratings of extension approaches and agents by adopters of improved fallows and biomass transfers
To realize agroforestry benefits
More consistent extension effort Development of unified method Training of partners in agroforestry Appropriate programs and policies required