Advertisement

Adoption of Recommended Maize Production Practices and Productivity Among Farmers in Morogoro District, Tanzania

  • Consolatha J. Gahanga
  • Justin K. UrassaEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Climate Change Management book series (CCM)

Abstract

The chapter is based on a study that aimed at assessing the adoption of recommended maize production practices and productivity between farmers who were members of Farmer Field Schools (FFSs) and those who were not. The study was conducted in Morogoro District, Tanzania. Specifically, the study aimed at identifying FFS recommended maize production technologies; determining socio-economic factors influencing farmers’ adoption of the technologies; and comparing maize productivity and income between households involved in FFS and those that are not. Lastly, it determined the contribution of maize sales to the household incomes of the two groups. The study adopted a cross-sectional research design whereby data was collected from 166 individuals through household surveys, focus group discussions and key informant interviews. Quantitative data was analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS), whereby descriptive statistics such as frequencies and percentages were determined. A logistic regression model was used to determine the association of socio-economic factors and the adoption of FFS technologies. Study findings show that age, education, household income and farm size significantly influenced the adoption of recommended FFS practices. Results also show that farmers who participated in the FFS had a higher maize productivity and maize sales were the main source of income in the study area. Thus, extension agents need to do more to encourage more farmers to join FFS so as to get access to improved maize technologies which will enable them to raise their maize productivity and ultimately their income and general living standards.

Keywords

Farmer field schools Adoption Maize Productivity Tanzania 

References

  1. ACT (Agriculture Council of Tanzania) (2010) Value chain analysis of rice and maize in selected districts in Tanzania: Volume I: introduction, context analysis and recommended way forward. Match Maker Associated Limited, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, p 89Google Scholar
  2. Adesina AA, Baidu-Forson J (1995) Farmers’ perceptions and adoption of new agricultural technology: evidence from analysis in Burkina Faso and Guinea, West Africa. Agric Econ 13(1):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adesina AA, Mbila D, Nkamleu GB, Endaman D (2000) Economic analysis of the determinants of adoption of alley farming by farmers in the forest zone of South west Cameroon. Agric Ecosyst Environ 80:255–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Adong A, Mwaura F, Okoboi G (2013) What factors determine membership of farmer group in Uganda? evidence from the Uganda census of agriculture 2008/9. J Sustain Dev 6(4):1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Akadugu MA, Guo E, Dadzie SK (2012) Adoption of modern agricultural production technologies by farm households in Ghana: what factors influence their decisions. J Biol Agric Healthc 2(3):1–13Google Scholar
  6. Alene AD, Poonyth D, Hassan RM (2000) Determinants of adoption and intensity of use of improved maize varieties in the central highlands of Ethiopia: a tobit analysis. Agrekon 39(4):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Anandajayasekeram P, Davis K, Workneh S (2007) Farmer field schools: an alternative to existing extension systems? experience from eastern and southern Africa. J Int Agric Exten Educ 14(1):81–93Google Scholar
  8. Ayinde OE, Adewumi MO, Olatunji GB, Babalola OA (2010) Determinants of adoption of downy mildew resistant maize by small-scale farmers in Kwara State, Nigeria. Afr J Agric Res 3(7):465–468Google Scholar
  9. Bamire AS, Abdoulaye T, Sanogo D, Langyintuo A (2010) Characterization of maize producing households in the dry savanna of Nigeria. CIMMYT, Nigeria, p 88Google Scholar
  10. Becerril J, Abdulai A (2009) The impact of improved maize varieties on poverty in Mexico: a propensity score-approach. World Dev 38:1024–1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Beshir B, Wegary D (2014) Determinants of smallholder farmers’ hybrid maize adoption in the drought prone central Rift Valley of Ethiopia. Afr J of Agric Res 9(17):1334–1343Google Scholar
  12. Bob M, Liz R (2010) Research methods. A Practical Guide for the Social Sciences, Rotolito Lombarda, Italy, p 121Google Scholar
  13. Braun A, Jiggins J, Roling N, van den Berg H, Sunijders P (2006) A global survey and review of farmer field schools experience. International Livestock Research Institute 35(4):661–676Google Scholar
  14. Bunyata DK, Mureithi JG, Onyango CA, Ngesa FU (2011) Farmer field school effectiveness for soil and crop management technologies in Kenya. J Int Agric Exten Educ 13(3):47–63Google Scholar
  15. Cerdán-Infantes P, Maffioli A, Ubfa D (2008) The impact of agricultural extension services: the case of grape production in Argentina. http://www20.iadb.org/intal/catalogo/PE/2009/03159.pdf. [28/08/2017]
  16. Chaves B, Riley J (2002) Determination of factors influencing integrated pest management adoption in coffee berry borer in Colombian farms. Agric Ecosyst Environ 87:159–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Covarrubias K, Nsiima L, Zezza A (2012) Livestock and livelihoods in rural Tanzania: a descriptive analysis of the 2009 National Panel Survey. International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya, p 57Google Scholar
  18. Davis K, Nkonya E, Kato E, Mekonnen DA, Odendo M, Miiro R, Nkuba J (2010) Impact of farmer field schools on agricultural productivity and poverty in East Africa. International Food Policy Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya, p 56Google Scholar
  19. Berg H van den, Jiggins J (2007) Farmer field schools reap long-term rewards. Pesticides News 78 December 2007Google Scholar
  20. Derksen-Schrock K, Anderson CL, Gugerty MK (2011) Tanzania: agricultural sector overview Evans School Policy Analysis and Research (EPAR), EPAR Brief No. 133Google Scholar
  21. Duveskog D, Frii-Hansen E (2013) Farmer field schools; a platform for transformative learning in rural Africa. In: Mezirow J, Taylor E (eds) Transformative learning in action: hand book of practice. Jossey-Bass Press, UppsalaGoogle Scholar
  22. Ebewore SO (2013) Cocoa farmer field graduate farmers perceived benefits of ffs training in Ondo state, Nigeria. Asian J Agric Sci 5(4):74–82Google Scholar
  23. Ebojei CO, Ayinde TB, Akogwu GO (2012) Socio-economic factors influencing the adoption of hybrid maize in Giwa local government area of Kaduna State, Nigeria. J Agric Sci 7(1):23–32Google Scholar
  24. Ellis F, Mdoe N (2003) Livelihoods and rural poverty reduction in Tanzania. World Dev 31(8):1367–1384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fadare AO, Akerele D, Toritseju B (2014) Factors affecting adoption decisions of maize farmers in Nigeria. Int J Food Agric Econ 2(3):45–54Google Scholar
  26. FAO (2009) High level expert forum report - how to feed the world in 2050. 00153 Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  27. FAO (2012) “Climate change, smallholders and traditional farming communities” demonstrates how smallholder farmers have developed strategies to increase their resilience to external shocks while maintaining ecosystem goods and services. Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome, Italy, p 24Google Scholar
  28. FAO (Undated) Farmer Field Schools and Empowerment: Community Empowerment, Social Inclusion and Gender Equality Experience from Jordan and Tunisia. http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/rne/docs/FFS_Empowerment.pdf. [29/08/2017]
  29. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations) (2014) Tanzania Country Programming Framework January 2014 – June 2016. www.fao.org/3/a-bp609e.pdf. [12/09/2018]
  30. Feder G, Just RE, Zilberman D (1985) Adoption of agricultural innovations in developing countries: a survey. Econ Dev Cult Chang 33(3):255–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fisher M, Mazunda J (2011) Could low adoption of modern maize varieties in Malawi be explained by farmers’ interest in diverse seed characteristics?. International Food Policy Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya, p 4Google Scholar
  32. Foster AD, Rosenzweig MR (2010) Microeconomics of technology adoption. Annu Rev Econ 2010:2Google Scholar
  33. Garson DG (2012) General linear models: univariate GLM, ANOVA/ANCOVA, repeated measures, Vol 6(7). Statistical Associates Publishers, Asheboro, pp 21–24Google Scholar
  34. Goodbody S (1990) Maize, time of planting: a review of recent work in Tanzania. In: Moshi AJ and Ransom JK (eds) Maize research in Tanzania proceedings of the first Tanzania National Maize Workshop, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, pp 2–10Google Scholar
  35. Haefele SM, Wopereis MCS, Ndiaye MK, Barro SE, Ould IM (2003) Internal nutrient efficiencies fertilizer recovery rates and indigenous nutrient supply of irrigated lowland rice in Sahelian West Africa. J Field Crop Res 80:19–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kaliba ARM, Verkuijl H, Mwangi W, Mwilawa AJT, Anandajayasekeram P, Moshi AJ (1998) Adoption of Maize Production Technologies in Central Tanzania. Mexico, D.F.: International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), the United Republic of Tanzania, and the Southern Africa Centre for Cooperation in Agricultural Research (SACCAR).Google Scholar
  37. Kaliba RMA, Verkuijl H, Mwangi W (2000) Factors affecting adoption of improved maize seeds and use of inorganic fertilizer for maize production in the intermediate and lowland zones of Tanzania. J Agric Appl Econ 32(1):35–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Karanja DD, Renkow M, Crawford EW (2003) Welfare effects of maize technologies in marginal and high potential regions of Kenya. Agric Econ 28:193–216Google Scholar
  39. Kariyisa K, Dewi YA (2013) Analysis of factors affecting adoption of integrated crop management farmer field school (Icm-Ffs) in swampy areas. Int J Food Agric Econ 1(2):29–38Google Scholar
  40. Katinila N, Verkuijl H, Mwangi W, Anandajayasekeram P, Moshi AJ (1998) Adoption of maize production technologies in Southern Tanzania. International Maize and Wheat Improvement. Center (CIMMYT), the United Republic of Tanzania, and the Southern Africa and the Southern Africa Centre for Cooperation in Agricultural Research (SACCAR), Mexico, D.F.Google Scholar
  41. Keenja C (2001) Food security in Tanzania. The way forward. The Eighth Sokoine Memorial Lecture. Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania, p 75Google Scholar
  42. Khisa GS, Heinemann E (2006) Chapter 5: Farmer Empowerment through Farmer Field Schools. https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/FullTextPDF/2009/20093203632. [28/08/2017]
  43. Kokate KD, Kharde PB, Patil SS, Deshmukh BA (2009) Farmers led. Extension experience and road ahead. Indian Res J Ext Educ 9(2):18–21Google Scholar
  44. Larsen AF, Lilleør HB (2014) Beyond the field: the impact of farmer field schools on food security and poverty alleviation. World Dev 64:843–859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Leavens MK, Anderson CL (2011) Gender and agriculture in Tanzania EPAR Brief No. 134. Evans School Policy Analysis and Research (EPAR), University of WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  46. Liberio J (2012) Factors contributing to adoption of sunflower farming innovations in Mlali ward, Mvomero District, Morogoro Region. Dissertation for Award of MSc. Degree at Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania, p 91Google Scholar
  47. Livingston G, Schonberger S, Delaney S (2011) Sub-Saharan Africa: the state of smallholders in agriculture. International Fund for Agricultural Development, Rome, p 36Google Scholar
  48. Loevinsohn M, Sumberg J, Diagne A, Whitfield S (2013) Under what circumstances and conditions does adoption of technology result in increased agricultural productivity? Institute of Development studies, Brighton, UK. https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/bitstreamhandle/123456789/3208/Productivity%20systematic%20review%20report%203.pdf;jsessionid=FD90D6085FDDDB2250324C881A89FFF6?sequence=1. [28/08/2017]
  49. MAFC (Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives) (2008) Agricultural sector review and public. Expenditure review 2008/2009. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, p 45Google Scholar
  50. Mathenge MK, Smale M, Olwande J (2012) The impact of maize hybrids on income, poverty, and inequality among smallholder farmers in Kenya. Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics and Department of EconomicsGoogle Scholar
  51. Mattee AZ, Mussa KR, Mwaseba DL, Mahonge CP, Nsenga JV (2015) Factors in smallholder farmers’ vulnerability to climate change impacts in the Uluguru Mountains, Morogoro, Tanzania. In: Lal R, Singh B, Mwaseba D, Kraybill D, Hansen D, Eik L (eds) Sustainable intensification to advance food security and enhance climate resilience in Africa. Springer, Cham, pp 185–195Google Scholar
  52. Matthew B, Ross L (2010) Research methods, a practical guide for sciences. Perason Education Limited 2010, Rotolito Lombarda, Italy, p 490Google Scholar
  53. Mendola M (2003) Agricultural technology and poverty reduction: a micro-level analysis of causal effects (November 2003). Centro Studi Luca D’Agliano Development Studies Working Paper No. 179Google Scholar
  54. Michelle KJ (2005) Technology adoption in West Africa: adoption and disadoption of soy beans on the Togo-Benin Border. Dissertation for Award of MSc Degree at North Carolina State University, Releigh, p 175Google Scholar
  55. Mmasa JJ (2013) Women participation in agriculture in Tanzania – challenges and policy recommendations - Tanzania Country Level Knowledge Network - CLKnet Policy Brief No 8: 2013 CLKnet - Policy Brief No: 8Google Scholar
  56. Mojo S, Norton GW, Alwang J, Rhinehart I, Deom CM (2007) Peanut research and poverty reduction: impacts of variety improvement to control peanut viruses in Uganda. Am J Agric Econ 89:448–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Morogoro District Council (2012) Morogoro District planning report, MorogoroGoogle Scholar
  58. Morris ML, Tripp R, Dankyi AA (1999) Adoption and impacts of improved maize production technology: a case study of the Ghana grains development project. Economics program paper 99-01. CIMMYT, Mexico, D.F.Google Scholar
  59. Msuya EE, Hisano S, Nairu T (2008) Explaining productivity variation among smallholder maize farmers in Tanzania. Munich Personal RePEc Archive. https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/14626/1/Explaining_Productivity_Variation_among_Smallholder_Maize_[10/04/2018]
  60. Muhammad A, Muhamad SH (2012) Analysis of farmer field school (ffs) as a potential source of advanced technology dissemination. OIDA Int J Sustain Dev 3(1):65–70Google Scholar
  61. Murage AW, Obare G, Chianu J, Amudavi DM, Midega CAO, Pickett JA, Khan ZR (2012) The effectiveness of dissemination pathway on adoption of “push-pull” technology in Western Kenya. Q J Int Agric 51(1):51–71Google Scholar
  62. Mutuah BP (2013) Factors influencing adoption of recommended cassava production practices by farmers in Bwari and Kuje Area Councils, Abuja, Federal Capital Territory. A Thesis submitted to the School of Postgraduate Studies, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of degree of Masters of Science in Agricultural Extension. Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Faculty of Agriculture, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria July, 2013. http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/5913. [29/08/2017]
  63. Mwanzia KJ (2014) Influence of farmer groups capacity on their ability to advocate for government agricultural services in Khwisero Sub-County Kenya. Dissertation for Award of MA Rural Development at University of Nairobi, Kenya, p 91Google Scholar
  64. Mwaura F (2014) Effect of farmer group membership on agricultural technology adoption and crop productivity in Uganda. Afr Crop Sci J 22:1–11Google Scholar
  65. Nanai NAK (1993) Peasant participation in community development projects: its implication in laying a strategy for participatory extension. Dissertation for Award of MSc Degree at Sokoine University of Agriculture, Morogoro, Tanzania. p 138Google Scholar
  66. Nathaniels QRN (2005) Cowpea, Farmer Field Schools and Farmer-to-Farmer Extension: network paper no. 148. AgREN, Benin, p 15Google Scholar
  67. NBS (National Bureau of Statistics) (2013) 2011/12 Household budget survey: key findingsGoogle Scholar
  68. Ngeno JK (2003) Farmer Field Schools. The Kenyan Experience Report of the Farmer Field School Stake holder’s Forum held on the 27th March 2003 at International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  69. Nyangena W, Juma OM (2014) Impact of improved farm technologies on yields: the case of improved maize varieties and inorganic fertilizer in Kenya. Environment for development, discussion paper series EfD DP 14-02Google Scholar
  70. Nyomora A, Kanyeka Z, Nduguru A (2012) Supporting Tanzania’s cocoa farmers. Research report no. 3. REPOA, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, p 43Google Scholar
  71. OECD (2001) Measuring productivity: measurement of aggregate and industry-level. OECD Manual. [www.SourceOECD.org] site visited 14/06/2014
  72. Ojo MA, Jibowa AA (2008) Socio-economic characteristics influencing role performance of rural community power actors in agricultural extension delivery system in Osun State, Nigeria. J Agric Rural Dev 3375(2):27–40Google Scholar
  73. Okoth JO (2013) Tillage and variety effects on soil moisture content, biological nitrogen fixation and soybean (Glycine Max L.) yield in Western Kenya. MSc. Thesis, Egerton University, p 45Google Scholar
  74. Owusu V, Abdulai A, Abdul-rahman S (2011) Non-farm work and food security among farm households in Northern Ghana. Food Policy 36:108–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Pallant J (2011) SPSS Survival manual: a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS 4th edition. Allen & Unwin, Australia. Printed in China at Everbest Printing Co. p 345Google Scholar
  76. Peterman A, Behrman J, Quisumbing A (2010) A review of empirical evidence on gender differences in non land agricultural inputs, technology, and services in developing countries. Discussion paper 00975. International Food Policy Research Institute, Nairobi, KenyaGoogle Scholar
  77. Pontius J, Dilts R, Bartlett A (2002) Ten years of IPM. Food and Agriculture Organisation Community Programme, JakartaGoogle Scholar
  78. Rugumamu CP (2009) Assessment of post-harvest technologies and gender relations in maize loss reduction in Pangawe village Eastern Tanzania. Tanzania J Sci 35:1–10Google Scholar
  79. Salasya B, Mwangi W, Mwabu D, Diallo A (2007) Factors influencing adoption of stress-tolerant maize hybrid (WH 502) in western Kenya. Afr J Agric Res 2(10):544–551Google Scholar
  80. Schneider K, Gugerty MK (2011) Agricultural productivity and poverty reduction: linkages and pathways. Evans School Rev 1(1):56–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Simtowe F, Asfaw S, Diagne A, Shiferaw B (2010) Determinants of agricultural adoption: the case of improved groundnut varieties in Malawi. Paper presented at Joint 3rd African Association of Agricultural Economists and 48th Agricultural Economists Association of South Africa Conference, Cape Town, South Africa, 19–23 Sept 2010Google Scholar
  82. Tabi AJ, Vabi MB, Malaa DK (2010) Adoption of maize and cassava production technologies in the Forest-savanna zone of Cameroon: implication for poverty reduction. World Appl Sci J 11(2):196–209Google Scholar
  83. Tsusaka T, Otsuka K (2013) The impact of technological changes on crop yields in sub-Saharan Africa, 1967–2004. In: Otsuka K, Larson D (eds) An African green revolution: finding ways to boost productivity on small farms. Springer Publisher, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp 1–23Google Scholar
  84. Uaiene R, Arndt C, Masters W (2009) Determinants of agricultural technology adoption in Mozambique. Discussion paper no. 67Google Scholar
  85. Urassa JK (2010) Rural household livelihoods, crop production and well-being after a period of trade reforms: a case study of Rukwa, Tanzania. Doctoral thesis, University of Sussex, SussexGoogle Scholar
  86. Urassa JK (2015) Factors influencing maize crop production at household levels: a case of Rukwa region in the southern highlands of Tanzania. Afr J Agric Res 10(10):1097–1106, March 2015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. URT (2003) Tanzania agriculture sample census, country report, p 288. www.kilimo.go.tz/agricultural%20statistics/Agric%20census/large%20scale. [10/3/2013]
  88. URT (2004) Ministry of Agriculture and Food and Ministry of Regional Administration and Local Government. Agricultural Extension Reform in Tanzania. A Vision and Strategy outline to year 2010 Main Report. Task Force on Agricultural Extension Reform, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, p 53Google Scholar
  89. URT (2011) Agricultural sector development programme performance report. Dar es SalaamGoogle Scholar
  90. URT (2013) The economic survey 2012. Ministry of Finance, Dar es Salaam, TanzaniaGoogle Scholar
  91. Wekesa E, Mwangi W, Verkuijl H, Danda K, De Groote H (2003) Adoption of maize production technologies in the Coastal Lowlands of Kenya. [http://repository.cimmyt.org:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10883/915/448348.PDF?sequence=4&isAllowed=y]. [2/08/2014]
  92. Weyori AE, Mulubrhan A, Waibel H (2012) Agricultural innovations systems and adoption decision: findings from a study of Ghanaian Plantation Sector. Institute of Development and Agricultural Economics, Leibniz University Hannover, Germany, p 30Google Scholar
  93. World Bank (2007) World development report 2008 agriculture for development. Int Bank Reconstr Dev 4(7):39–51Google Scholar
  94. World Bank (2012) Agribusiness indicators: Tanzania. World Bank, Washington, DC. © World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/26561. License: CC BY 3.0 IGO. [13/09/2018]
  95. Zvonko P, Gordana G (2009) The use of herbicides for weed control in direct wet-seeded rice (Oryza sativa L.). J Plant Prot Sci 45(3):113–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ilala Municipal CouncilDar es SalaamTanzania
  2. 2.Department of Policy Planning and ManagementCollege of Social Sciences and Humanities, Sokoine University of AgricultureMorogoroTanzania

Personalised recommendations