Factors affecting farmers' adoption of technologies in farming system ...

Omonrice 10: 94-100 (2002)Factors affecting farmers’ adoption of technologies in farmingsystem: A case study in OMon district, Can Tho province,Mekong Delta.Truong Thi Ngoc Chi 1 and Ryuichi Yamada 2ABSTRACTFarmers’ changes of technology use are influenced by technical training,meeting, oral transmission, trust on technician and belief level on technology. Menusually use technologies for rice, fruit and fish production, and women usetechnology for pig, chicken production. Factors that trigger adoption of newtechnologies comprise of progressive, young and educated male farmers. Factorslimited adoption of technology included conservative old men, and weak belief onensure high yield of new technology. Though farmers have positive perception oftechnology, they faced problems in technology application due to lack of capital,lack the direction from the government and extension, lack compensation policy inensure of yield.INTRODUCTIONA farming system is the result of acomplex interaction of a number ofinterdependent components – soil, water,crops, livestock, labor and other resourcewithinan environmental setting.The total environment can be dividedinto two elements: technology and human.Technology determines the type and physicalpotential of livestock enterprises, and includesthe physical and biological factors that can bemodified through technology development.The human element is characterized byexogenous (community structures, externalinstitution, etc.) and endogenous factors,which can be controlled by the farmhousehold. At the center of this interaction ishousehold member. The household ultimatelydecides on the farming systems on whether ornot to adopt technologies and how to assignresources to support it (Norman, 1980, citedby Paris). The decision of use of technologiesis dependent on how farmers perceive oftechnology. According to Price (1996),perception acts as filter through which newobservations are interpreted. According toVan de Ban and Hawkin (1988), perception isthe process by which we received informationor stimuli from our environment and transformit into psychological awareness. Decisionmaking model of Norton and Mumford (1983,cited by Heong, et al. 1994) shows that, onthe basis of perception of the problem, farmerassesses expected outcomes. The farmer’schoice of action (decision) will depend on hisevaluation of this and other outcomes, in termof his own personal perspectives. Allport,1965 cited that perception involves tounderstanding, and awareness of a meaningor recognition of the objects. In this research,the objects are technologies. Koppel (1978),the predominant role of technology isfacilitating major improvement in agricultureproductivity. Therefore, it is important to knowhow farmers perceived of technologies forbetter understanding of their choice indecision of adoption or not. Technology is oneof resources for agricultural production.According to Ingold (2002), definitions oftechnology differ widely, depending onwhether the intent is to embrace the totality ofhuman works, in all societies and during allepochs. Rogers (1983) reported thattechnology is a design for instrumental actionthat reduced the uncertainty in the cause andeffect relationships involved in achieving adesired outcome. Technology comprises of1 Cuu Long Delta Rice Research Institute, Omon, Cantho, Vietnam2 Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8686 Japan

Factors affecting farmers’ adoption of technologies in farming system … 95two components, hardware and soft ware.The hardware consists of physical tool thatembodies technology. The software consistsof information base for the tool. In Mumford’sclassification (1946), “technology–as–objects”encompasses the entire range of fabricateditems intended for some use or other,including tools, utensils, utilities, apparatusand machines. Mitcham (1978), “technology–as–process”, includes most importantly theactivities we commonly denote as making andusing. The key element here is that of skilldefined as ‘proficiency in the use of artefact’.Ingold (2002) distinguished technique fromtechnology. Technique refers to skills,regarded as capability of particular humansubjects, and technology means a corpus ofgeneralized, objective knowledge, insofar as itis capable of practical application.Technology can be reached farmersthrough technology transfer. Technologytransfer refers to the general process ofmoving information and skills from informationor knowledge ‘generators’ such as researchlaboratories and universities to clients such asfarmers (Valera et al. 1987).The outcome of new technologytransfer is the farmers’ adoption and bringingthis into practice and further diffusion to otherindividuals in the community.Regarding to adoption, farmerssometimes discover problems in puttingrecommendation into practice, the extent ofadoption, adjustment or rejection depends onfarmers' behavior (Valera et al. 1987). Mosher(1987, cited by Cruz, 1978) defined thatadoption of an innovation is the process bywhich a particular farmer is exposed to,considers, and finally rejects or practices aparticular innovation. The innovation decisionmodel by Rogers (1983) shows the processthrough which an individual (or other decisionmaking unit) passes from first knowledge ofan innovation to forming an attitude towardsthe innovation, to a decision to adopt or reject,to implement of the new idea, and toconfirmation of this decision.Diffusion is the process by which aninnovation is communicated through certainchannels overtime among the members of asocial system (Rogers, 1983). When newideas are invented, they are diffused andadopted or rejected. We use the concept ofdiffusion in our study in term of understandinghow many farmers know and use oftechnology. Valera et al. (1987) reported thatthe community is composed of differentgroups of people, in general, diffusion ofinnovation will take place only within groups ofpeople who are homogenous in terms ofproblems, aspirations and needs. Accordingto Cruz (1987), time is an important factors inthe process of diffusion. The system’s socialstructure can have an important influence onthe spread of new ideas. It can impede orfacilitate the rate of diffusion and adoption ofnew ideas. The norms, social statuses,hierarchy, and so on of a social systeminfluence the behavior of individual.There are number of factors thatinfluence the extent of adoption of technologysuch as characteristics or attributes oftechnology; the adopters or clientele, which isthe object of change; the change agent(extension worker, professional, etc.); and thesocio-economic, biological, and physicalenvironment in which the technology takeplace Cruz (1987). Farmers have been seenas major constraint in development process(Cruz 1987). They are innovators or laggards.Socio-psychological trait of farmers isimportant. The age, education attainment,income, family size, tenure status, credit use,value system, and beliefs were positivelyrelated to adoption. The personalcharacteristics of extension worker such ascredibility, have good relationship withfarmers, intelligence, emphatic ability,sincerity, resourcefulness, ability tocommunicate with farmers, persuasiveness,and development orientation. The biophysicalenvironment influences the adoption. Theconditions of the farm include its location,availability of resources and other facilitiessuch as roads, markets, transportation, pests,rainfall distribution, soil type, water, services,and electricity. For instance, farmers whosefarms were irrigated were the earliestadopters of new rice varieties, while thosewithout water were the late adopters. Theinnovation diffuses slowly if product price islow.

96Truong Thi Ngoc Chi et al.Rogers and Shoemaker (1974)identified important variables that determinethe rate of adoption. One of these variables isthe perceived characteristic of the innovationor technology. To be readily accepted oradopted, an innovation must possess fiveimportant attributes: relatively advantage,compatibility, complexity, trial ability, andobservability. Some technologies are adoptedmore rapidly than others because the farmersperceived them to have differentcharacteristics.Farmers' use of technologies can beinfluenced by various socio-economic factors.Thus, this informal survey was conducted inOmon district, Cantho province to understandfarmers’ view of technology and factorsaffecting in apply and adoption of technology.METHOD OF GATHERING INFORMATIONFocus group discussions mentioned byASA (1997) were used to collect thequalitative data. Group discussion wasconducted with knowledgeable farmers andleaders of hamlets in Thoi Thanh, Thoi Longand Thoi Lai villages (O Mon district, Canthoprovince, Mekong Delta) to draw upon theinformation on how farmer view of technology,their experience, belief, and adoption oftechnology. The additional contact withindividual farmer for complimentinginformation was also conducted.RESULTS1. Farmers’ definition of technologyTechnology refers to how to cultivate acrop successfully. This success can beobtained by knowing how to apply fertilizer,control pests, and take care of plant for itshealthy and good growing. Other group offarmers said that technology refers to whatcrop varieties and what kind of fertilizers thatare suitable for the soil. Other definition fromfarmers is that technology is what introducedby scientists. This is knowledge. Technologyis in cohesion with arts. This means that it isflexible depending on soil and habits offarmers.They prefer the technology with lowinput but high benefit, and ensure highproductivity2. Farmers’ perception of technology.Farmer believed that technologies aregood to farmers. Farmers believe ontechnologies because they give goodefficiency in terms of high yield, less pest,and more benefit. Technology is important inagricultural production.3. Farmers’ learning of technology,training, adoption and diffusion.Farmers did not to be trained for mostof technologies related to agriculturalproduction. Farmers were trained ontechnology of Integrated Pest Management(IPM), veterinary in pig raising, and fishproduction.Farmers who attended in training hadtalks to other farmers about what they learnedfrom the courses. It was called as private oraltransmission. This kind of information diffusionusually occurred in coffee shop throughgossips. Therefore, most of men gotinformation from trained farmers. The level ofpractices the information from oraltransmission is not known. The effectivenessdepends on kind of technology and the placewhere it takes place. This kind of diffusionhappened spontaneously, if there isintervention at this step, the effectiveness oftechnology diffusion must be higher.Some production activities were notlearned from formal classes. For mushroomcultivation, farmers have not learnt anytechnologies from extension technician yet.However, they have heard information aboutmushroom cultivation from radio and from oraltransmission among farmers. Training for fruitproduction is negligible. Only some goodeating quality mango varieties Cat Chu andCat Hoa Loc were introduced to farmers andguide them how to plant. Farmers were taughthow to use of flowering stimulators for mangoand technology for fruit development. Thesetechnologies were adopted by only 1-2%farmers who have big orchards. The smallorchard holders planting few mangos do notneed to buy chemicals and hire labor to spraybecause they cannot use whole of chemicalbottle at one timeFarmers expected to be trained on cropproduction, and plant protection for the upland

Factors affecting farmers’ adoption of technologies in farming system … 97crops. For fruit tree, farmers are afraid ofweather problems. Farmers want to be trainedon treatment for flowering, technologies forincreasing rate of sitting fruits. For rice,farmers want to have intensive course for pestmanagement, rice production with using drumseeder and leaf color chart. Though thesetraining courses for rice were alreadyorganized, farmers are still not yet all believedTraining is the most important factor foradoption of technology. Since 1994, farmershave been trained on Integrated PestManagement (IPM) in rice production fromextension workers. So far, there have been45% of farmers who attended IPM training inThoi Thanh village. The adoption of thisstrategy was only 20%. The rest did not.However, IPM technology was used by mostof farmers in Thoi Lai village by applying thesimple rule of not spraying insecticide before30 days after sowing.For those farmers who adopted lowseeding rate and less fertilizer through usingleaf color chart to reduce nitrogen fertilizer inrice because they found that low seeding rateand less fertilizer application reduce ricedisease infestation. Haft of farmers adopted ofrow seeding. The rest are afraid of low yieldfrom row seeding due to low seed rate in thistechnique. They are afraid of golden snailattacking the rice field with low seed rate, thenthere is nothing to compensate. Farmerseasily adopt Jasmin rice variety because thisis good quality rice and can be sold high priceat harvest.Training on aquaculture and husbandry:At the beginning, farmers practised fishcultivation based on their own experience.Later, training was organized by techniciansfrom extension station. This technology wasadopted easily by farmers. ProvincialAgricultural Extension Center in co-ordinationwith Extension of the village guided farmersin aquaculture and husbandry. However, thereare not many farmers having aquaculturebecause of the following reasons:- There is not yet dikes constructed toprevent water during flood season, and- They lack of capitals for constructingdikes to raise fish, buying fingerlings andother materials. (At present they canaccess small loan only for rice cultivation)So far there have been 3 times oftraining on aquaculture : (1) Training of raisingcarp, silver carp; (2) Training of raising Gobyfish, (3) Training of raising Giant Fresh WaterPrawn. Contents of the training includes:- Pond preparation, sanitary.- Selection fingerlings (same sizefingerlings)- Caring: feeding, rate of food of about 5%of releasing weight- Density: fingerlings/ unit area.- Veterinary- Storage- HarvestingPig raising is mostly at household levelwith very small extent (1-2 pigs perhousehold). There is only guidance onmedicine for pig raising through training ormeeting. The new pig varieties were alsointroduced. Farmers like pig variety to shortenduration of rearing and fast increasing ofweight.Reasons for not adoption of technology:- Farmers did not believe because it wasnew to them.- They have not yet seen the demonstrationfields.- They worried of low yield- Low education- Old age farmers: did not believe newtechnology and only believe their ownexperience.- Old behavior of cultivation practicesembedded in farmers for long period:were not persuaded to use newtechnology. They only practised by theirown practices such as using high rate ofseeds in directly broadcasting andspraying pesticide for prevention of insectoccurrence.- Large land holding farmers: Farmers arefeeling that it is not so sure about newtechnologies, particularly to those farmershave large land. They said if the yieldloss due to new technologies in largerfield, the amount of loss will be greater.According to Lazaro et al. (1993), farmersusually overestimate the yield loss causedby insects rather than the actual loss.

98Truong Thi Ngoc Chi et al.- Problem in applying technologies: nottotally believe in technologies, and lack ofcapital. Labor is not difficult in applicationof technologies because farming is seenas their work for the food.Reasons for adoption of technology:- These farmers are progressive farmers.They believe on science and technology.- Education: They went to school. Theyknow how to read and write (most aremen).- Age group: They are young, less than 40years old.- Recognition of saving money and healthfrom IMP strategy.- Those farmers having stable in economybelieve in technologies. Farmers who areold and conservatives do not.4. Adaptation of technologiesThe technologies can be used flexibly.For example, timing, quantity and kind offertilizer for application can be modifiedaccording to climate or weather, the level ofsilt deposit after flooding period.5. Reasons for changing in using oftechnologies- Introduction from technicians, attendtechnical training- Trust on technicians- Observe demonstration fields, and believethat it is effective and then decide tochange- Test and recognize it is effective- Oral transmission of new technologiesamong farmers through special occasionas dead anniversary, weeding, sitting incoffee shop- Climate, weather.- Change in soil fertility: silt deposition inflooding periodFarmers found that if a technology givethem more benefit, more effective in income,they will change to use that technology. Forexample: change from normal rice to qualityrice to sell higher price.6. Ranking of technologies in terms offarmers’ likenessFarmers like IPM strategy for riceproduction very much followed by technologyfor pig raising, and the third likeness is fishcultivation. Though fish cultivation give higherbenefit than big rearing as in the says bypeople that “ If you want to be rich, you raisefish; if you want to be medium rich, you raisebig; if you want to be poor, you rear ducks”,rearing big is most popular at household levelin the community than fish.Table 1: Ranking of technology in term of farmers’ likenessTechnologiesIPMBig raisingFish cultivationLikeness1 st2 nd3rd7. Gender issueGender in training: Most of women donot access to technical training. They arebusy with household chores and caring ofchildren. They had no time to attend thetraining. They obtained low education andthey were not invited. For example, in ThoiThanh village, there is 30 % of women whoattended IPM training in the last two years (atotal of 25 participants, only 7-8 are women).In Thoi Lai village, the rate of womenparticipation in technical training was only10%.Gender use of technology: Most oftechnologies were used by men. IPMtechnology is mostly used by male farmers(70% of men and 30% of women). Rowseeding (use of drum seeder) was used bymen only.Regarding to animal technologies,male farmers followed new technologies foranimal raising meanwhile female farmers

Factors affecting farmers’ adoption of technologies in farming system … 99followed traditional practices because theireducation was lower than men which limitsthem in adoption of new technologies. Theygradually change to new technologies fromthe traditional practicesHusband knows technologies morethan wife. Wife usually practises in the field.Table 2: Who did moreActivityRice productionFish rearingChicken raisingPig rearingPlanting pesticide-free vegetablesMango, Sapota planting and caring8. Farmers’ wealth : Farmers’ wealth mayhave influence on technology adoption.Who workHusband > WifeHusband > WifeWife > HusbandWife > HusbandWife > HusbandHusband > WifeFarmers classify their wealth as rich, mediumand poor.Table 3: Classification of households based on household economy:Criteria Rich Medium PoorLand area 2-3 ha 1-1.5 ha 0-0.4 haIncome/capita > 500 000 VND/month 500 000 VND/month < 100 000 VND/monthHouse type Permanent Semi permanent TemporaryEntertainment Color television Color television Second hand colormeanEquipmentMotorcycleThresherRotovatorMotorcycleHalf of them havingthreshertelevisionNoneOther activities Big trading Small trading Making bamboo trapfor catching smallprawnFood Delicious Medium delicious Lack of nutrientCONCLUSIONFactors affecting in change oftechnology use include the access to thetechnical training, meeting, oral transmission,trust on technician and believe on technologyintroduced by scientist.Technologies for rice, fruit and fishproduction are mostly used by men and forhusbandry (pig, chicken) by women. Moremen than women access to technical trainingand meeting.Factors that trigger adoption of newtechnologies comprise of progressive, youngand educated farmers. However, not allfarmers adopted technologies introducedbecause it they are new to them. They werefeeling hesitated in application of newtechnology because they do not believe thatthe new technology can ensure the high yield.These farmers are usually old age and workbased on their own experience.Though farmers perceived technologyas good thing to them, they still facedproblems in application of technologies.These comprise of lacking of capital, directionof the government and extension, lack ensureof yield by compensation policy.

100Truong Thi Ngoc Chi et al.REFERENCESASA (American Statistical Association) 1997. Section ofSurvey methods. American StatisticalAssociation, USA.Cruz FA. 1978. Adoption and diffusion of agriculturalextensions. In An introduction to extensiondelivery systems by JB Valera, VA Martinez, andRF Plopino eds.) 1987. Island Publishing House,Manila. P. 97-127.Heong KL, MM Escalada, and Vo Mai. 1994. An analysisof insecticide use in rice: case studies in thePhilippines and Vietnam. International Journal ofPest Management, 1994, 40(2) 173-178Ingold Tim. 2002. The Perception of the Environment,Essays in livelihood, dwelling and skill. Publishedby Routledge Taylor & Francis Group, Londonand New York.. p. 294-322.Koppel B. 1978. Agricultural Change and SocialStructure: A Longitudinal Analysis. Philippinesociological review 26 (1978) 57-73.Lazaro AA, EG Rubia, LP Almazan, and KL Heong. 1993.Farmers’ estimates of percent whiteheads (WH).International Rice Research Notes, 18,31.Mitcham C. 1978. Types of Technology. Research inPhilosophy and technology 1: 229-294Mosher AT 1978. An introduction to Agriculturalextension. Singapore University Press. (Cited byFA Cruz. 1978. Adoption and diffusion ofagricultural extensions. In An introduction toextension delivery systems by JB Valera, VAMartinez, and RF Plopino eds.) 1987. IslandPublishing House, Manila. P. 97-127.Mumford L. 1946. Technics and Civilization. London:Routledge.Paris, TR. (no year) Integrating the gender variable infarming system research. (unpublished).Rogers, EM and FF Shoemaker. 1971. Communication ofInnovations: A Cross – Cultural Approach. 2 nd Ed.The Free Press. New York.Rogers, EM 1983. Diffusion of innovations (3 rd edition).The Free Press. A Division of MacmillanPublishing Co., Inc. New York. Collier MacmillanPublishers, London.Valera, JB and RF Plopino. 1987. Philosophy andprinciple of extension. In An introduction toextension delivery systems by JB Valera, VAMartinez, and RF Plopino (editors) 1987. IslandPublishing House, Manila. P. 51-61.van de Ban AW and HS Hawkin 1988. AgriculturalExtension. John Willey & Sons, New York, UnitedStates. P. 61-127.SUMMARY IN VIETNAMESEYếu tố ảnh hưởng đến sự tiếp nhận kỹ thuật của nông dântrong hệ thống canh tác ở Ô Môn, Cần ThơSự thay đổi kỹ thuật trong canh tác của nông dân là do việc tham dự các lớptập huấn, hội họp, sự truyền miệng từ nông dân này sang nông dân khác, mức độtin tưởng vào cán bộ kỹ thuật và mức độ tin cậy vào hiệu quả kỹ thuật. Nam nôngdân thường sử dụng các kỹ thuật phục vụ cho sản xuất lúa, cây ăn trái và cá. Tráilại, nữ nông dân thường sử dụng kỹ thuật về chăn nuôi nhiều hơn nam. Yếu tốthúc đẩy sự tiếp nhận kỹ thuật mới bao gồm sự cấp tiến, trẻ tuổi và trình độ vănhoá. Những nông dân trẻ tuổi, có tính tiến bộ và biết đọc biết viết tiếp nhận kỹthuật mới nhanh hơn. Những nông dân lớn tuổi và bảo thủ không tin tưởng nhiềuvào kỹ thuật mới. Phần lớn nông dân có nhận thức đúng đắn về kỹ thuật, nhưngviệc áp dụng một kỹ thuật mới không dễ dàng đối với họ vì thiều vốn, thiếu sựhướng dẫn của cán bộ khuyến nông, chưa có chính sách chung của địa phương,và không có chế độ đền bù rủi ro của kỹ thuật mới đưa ra.