Can ICT-enabled knowledge acquisition bridge the gap in enhancing the adoption of multipurpose agroforestry tree species (MPTS) in Malawi?

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3592405/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Can ICT-enabled knowledge acquisition bridge the gap in enhancing the adoption of multipurpose agroforestry tree species (MPTS) in Malawi?

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3592405/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Journal Publication

published 03 Jul, 2024

Read the published version in Agroforestry Systems →

You are reading this latest preprint version

Low adoption of agroforestry and other sustainable agriculture practices presents a pressing issue for both policy makers and practitioners in Sub-Saharan Africa. The inefficiency of extension advisory services partly contributes to low adoption of these practices in this region. Using survey data collected from Mzimba and Dedza districts in Malawi, this study applies an Ordered Probit model to assess the effect of ICT-enabled knowledge acquisition on the adoption of multipurpose tree species (MPTS). The results show that radio, television and WhatsApp messenger are key ICT-based platforms facilitating MPTS adoption. On the other hand, community-based farmer advisors (CBFAs) are an important form of face-to-face extension approach for promoting the adoption of MPTS. From a gender perspective, the results show that women farmers are more likely to adopt MPTS than their male counterparts. The findings highlight the importance of strengthening ICT-enabled extension advisory services to complement in-person extension services in an era when the number of extension agents is dwindling and the available extension officers are constrained to reach millions of farmers. Additionally, there is a need to scale digital extension services by developing appropriate content suitable for specific digital platforms and the type of agroforestry practices being promoted.

ICT-enabled extension

Multipurpose Tree Species (MPTS) adoption

Agroforestry systems

Ordered Probit analysis

Sub-Saharan Africa

Since the 1980s there has been substantial investment in agroforestry research and development which has resulted in impressive scientific and technological advances (Atangana et al. 2014; Sanchez 1995). A number of agroforestry technologies and practices such as multipurpose tree species (MPTS) on farmlands, farmer managed natural regeneration (FMNR) and improved fallows are promoted, and if adopted, these management practices could contribute to climate-change resilience, increased food productivity, and stable incomes among farming families (Atangana et al. 2014; Sanchez 1995). The potential of agroforestry to intensify smallholder production systems and consequently contribute to food security, poverty reduction and enhance the delivery of critical ecosystem services is well-documented (Pretty et al. 2012; Jose 2009; Garrity 2004; Swamila et al. 2021). For example, studies show higher productivity for maize grown under fertilizer-tree agroforestry systems such as Gliricidia-maize intercrop compared to monocultures of maize under drought conditions (Kwesiga et al. 2003; Kerr et al. 2007). In another study, Sileshi et al. (2014) report increased fertilizer use efficiency in plots where maize is grown in association with fertilizer trees, either in rotation where maize follows fertilizer trees or under relay intercropping where maize is intercropped with fertilizer trees. Thus, unless agroforestry systems are adopted and maintained over a reasonable time period, their contribution to sustainable agricultural intensification would be trivial. However, there is slow/low adoption of agroforestry practices partly due to challenges associated with the delivery of extension advisory services (Meijer et al. 2015; Jerneck and Olsson 2013; Shiferaw et al. 2009; Kiptot et al. 2007; Mercer 2004; Pattanayak et al. 2003).

Recently, there has been a change in the delivery of agricultural extension advisory services in such a way that farmers receive information through a wide range of ICT sources (Aker, 2011; Larochelle et al. 2017; Bentley et al. 2019; Fabregas et al. 2019; Spielman et al. 2021). Public and private actors operating in developing countries have broadened their methods of disseminating knowledge by incorporating ICT-based approaches which include radio/TV programs, phone calls, interactive voice response (IVR) systems, short messaging services (SMS) and video messages (Aker, 2011; Larochelle et al. 2017; Bentley et al. 2019; Spielman et al. 2021). Thus, availability and access to modern ICT platforms present an opportunity to complement in-person extension and address some of the challenges associated with the delivery of extension advisory services. Meta-analysis review reveals that the transmission of agricultural information through mobile technologies in sub-Saharan Africa and India increased yields by 4% and the likelihood of adoption of recommended agrochemical inputs by 22% (Fabregas et al. 2019).

Notwithstanding the advances in agroforestry research and digital revolution, studies are yet to explore the effect of ICT-enabled knowledge dissemination on the adoption of natural resources management technologies such as agroforestry practices. The majority of extant studies have examined factors leading to the adoption or use of ICT in the agriculture sector (Aker, 2011; Lwesya and Kibambila, 2017; Fabregas et al. 2019; Spielman et al. 2021; Ragasa et al.2021) rather than examining the role of ICT platforms as catalyst for technology adoption. Yet ICT platforms facilitate speedy and wider transmission of information which can increase farmers’ knowledge outcomes for a particular technology. In addition, research evidence suggests that one of the notable causes of low adoption of agroforestry technologies in Southern Africa concerns inefficiencies in the extension advisory services (Aker, 2011; Ragasa and Niu 2017; Chavula, 2020). For example, currently, about 1,700 extension workers serve close to 4 million farmers in Malawi (Ragasa and Niu 2017; Chavula, 2020). This means that one extension worker is expected to serve between 2,500 and 3,000 farmers. Due to high ratio of extension worker to farmer, it is difficult to reach all smallholder farmers or provide up-to-date and tailored information to meet the needs of the farmers (Bell, 2015).

The objective of the present study is to assess the effect of ICT-enabled knowledge acquisition on adoption of multipurpose trees species. There is scanty research evidence highlighting how the use ICT channels impacts adoption of technologies in the natural resources management sector especially sustainable land use practices and agroforestry technologies such as MPTS. It is premised that the adoption of MPTS on farms can be increased through use of ICT-enabled extension advisory services. The digital revolution represents an opportunity to improve the speed and coverage of agricultural and natural resources advisory services. According to Oladele (2011) the advantages of ICT-enabled extension over the in-person extension system include: i) the potential to reach remote difficult to reach areas; ii) ability to exchange time-sensitive information e.g. market prices, disease outbreak etc. in a timely manner; iii) potential to reduce gender and cultural bias, where extension workers tend to support farmer categories in conformity with community’s culture or gender expectation. The evidence of wide network coverage and increase in the number of people using mobile telephone in Africa (Malawi included) presents a strong case for promoting ICT-enabled extension advisory services. Although various ICT delivery tools and approaches are available, there is limited empirical evidence regarding the effectiveness of these approaches and the conditions under which they work (Thapa and Sæbø 2014).

Study area

The study surveyed farming households as potential users of agroforestry technologies. The study was conducted in Dedza and Mzimba districts of Malawi. These districts were selected because the practice of multipurpose tree cultivation on farms had been promoted by a state and non-state actors including the World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF). The study was conducted in Manyamula and Champira Extension Planning Areas (EPAs) in Mzimba district, as well as Mtakataka and Bembeke EPAs in Dedza district. The four EPAs collectively comprised 5,500 households actively engaged in practicing different agroforestry practices on their farms (Database for Dedza and Mzimba districts, 2023). A total of 402 households were randomly selected to participate in the study. The study was conducted as part of a project called trees for better nutrition and health (T4NH), a sub-grant of the Sustainable Food Systems in Malawi (FoodMa) project supported by the Royal Kingdom of Norway.

Data analysis

The study adopted an ordered probit model to assess the relationship between ICT-enabled knowledge acquisition and farmers' adoption of MPTS. The dependent variable is a count of trees per acre, that is, trees of different age classes and species planted or managed by a particular household. This variable was later classified into three ordinal categories (high, medium, and low) based on the number of trees adopted by the respondents. A respondent was classified as: 1) low adoption category if s/he had at most 10 trees per acre of land; 2) medium adoption if they adopted more than 10 and up to 20 trees per acre; and 3) high if they adopted more than 20 trees per acre. This variable was regressed on the sources of extension advisory services and other control variables such as landholding size and household head’s age, sex and education. Given the ordered nature of the outcome variable, ordered probit was considered appropriate to assess the effects of ICT-assisted knowledge acquisition of the adoption of MPTS (Khatri et al., 2023; Long and Freese, 2001). The regression equation is expressed as\({y_{jk}}{\text{ }}={\text{ }}{\beta _0}{\text{ }}+{\text{ }}{\beta _1}{I_{jk}}{\text{ }}+{\text{ }}{\beta _2}{\text{ }}{X_{jk}}{\text{ }}+{\text{ }}\epsilon {\ominus _{jk}}\), where\({y_{jk}}\) indicates MPTS adoption by the \(k{\ominus ^{th}}\) farmer in adoption category \(j=1,2,3\). I is the main source of information or knowledge acquisition (extension advice),\({X_k}\) is a vector of control variables, β represents parameters to be estimated, and \(\epsilon {\ominus _i}\)is the random error term. The independent variables used in this study were chosen based on adoption theory and similar studies (Shiferaw et al., 2009; Khatri et al., 2023; Tega and Bojaso, 2023). These variables are presented in Table 1, which provides a description on how they were measured and their potential influence (expected sign) on MPTS adoption decision. The analysis was implemented using STATA Version 14.0.

Table 1

Descriptions of the dependent and independent variables hypothesized to influence the MPTS adoption
Variables	Definition and measurement	Expected sign
TREECOUNT	Number of trees per acre (Dependent variable)
Household characteristics
SEX	Sex of respondent (dummy: 1 = Female, 0 = otherwise)	\(-\)
AGE	Age of respondent in years (continuous)	\(\pm\)
EDUC	Education (years of formal schooling) (continuous)	\(+\)
TOTALLANDHOLDING	Land holding size of the respondent in acres (continuous )	\(\pm\)
In-person extension
MAINGOVT	Main source of information when first heard or saw MPTS through government extension workers (dummy: 1 = yes, 0 = otherwise)	\(\pm\)
MAINNGO	Main source of information when first heard or saw MPTS through non-governmental organization extension workers (dummy: 1 = yes, 0 = otherwise)	\(\pm\)
MAINCBFA	Main source of information when first heard or saw MPTS through community based farmer advisor or lead farmers (dummy: 1 = yes, 0 = otherwise)	\(\pm\)
ICT sources of information
MAINRADIO	Main source of information when first heard or saw MPTS through radio (dummy: 1 = yes, 0 = otherwise)	\(\pm\)
MAINTELEVISION	Main source of information when first heard or saw MPTS through television (dummy: 1 = yes, 0 = otherwise)	\(\pm\)
MAINWAP	Main source of information when first heard or saw MPTS through whatsapp messenger (dummy: 1 = yes, 0 = otherwise)	\(\pm\)
MAINPHONE/SMS	Main source of information when first heard or saw MPTS through mobile phone call or SMS (dummy: 1 = yes, 0 = otherwise)	\(\pm\)

Farmer’s awareness about MPTS and information sources

The study examined farmers' awareness about MPTS and the results in Table 2 show that most farmers (65.8%) were aware about the existence of various MPTS and their major functions such improving soil fertility (fertilizer trees), supply of fuelwood as a source of biomass energy, and source of food and nutrition (fruits). The most common MPTS in the study area were fruit trees such as Mangifera indica, Psidium guajava, Carica papaya, and Citrus sinensis, which had a high level of awareness, with over 90% of farmers being aware of their existence and use. On the other hand, Gliricidia sepium, Leucaena leucocephala, and Prunus Persia had a relatively lower level of awareness, with more than 70% of farmers indicating they were not aware. Further, respondents were asked about sources of information through which they first heard or knew about various MPTS. The results in Table 2 reveal that the most common information channels through which they knew about tree species are radio, reported by 44.6% of the respondents; government extension workers (42.7%) and community-based farmer advisor (CBFA) or lead farmers (42.0%). Notable percentages of farmers reported that they heard about Gliricidia sepium, Leucaena leucocephala, and Prunus Persia through government extension workers. Regarding ICT-enabled channels, radio was the most popular source of agroforestry information (31–56%), followed by WhatsApp messenger (10–20%). Some respondents reported that they knew about MPTS such as Gliricidia sepium and Acacia polycantha through WhatsApp messages transmitted through their whatsapp network (group of peer farmers). Other ICT-based information sources such as mobile phone calls or IVR also contribute to farmer awareness, albeit to a lesser extent compared to radio and WhatsApp messenger. Generally, tele- or mobile-phone calls are less commonly used to spread awareness about these tree species, with percentages ranging from 0.1–3.8%. The findings emphasize the importance of utilizing a diverse range of information sources to effectively raise awareness and educate farmers about MPTS.

Table 2

Pathways to Farmer Awareness, Information Sources, and Adoption of MPTS: Main Sources of Awareness and Information
MPTS	Aware		Main source of information about MPTS																Adoption
	Aware		Gvt		NGO		CBFA		Radio		TV		WhatsApp		Phone		Others		Adoption
	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No
Gliricidia sepium	27.1	72.9	62.4	37.6	17.4	82.6	36.7	63.3	37.6	62.4	4.6	95.4	20.2	79.8	3.7	96.3	0.9	99.1	7.7	92.3
Senna spectabilis	79.9	20.2	37.7	62.3	25.6	74.5	26.6	70.4	56.1	43.9	4.4	95.6	15.0	85.1	4.1	96.0	0.6	99.4	51.0	49.0
Leucaena leucocephala	27.6	72.4	59.5	40.5	27.9	82.1	40.5	59.5	33.3	66.7	0.1	99.1	14.4	85.6	0.1	99.1	0.0	100.0	4.2	95.8
Faidherbia albida	73.4	26.6	35.6	64.4	28.1	71.9	37.6	62.4	51.5	48.5	3.7	96.3	19.0	81.0	2.0	98.0	0.3	99.7	20.2	79.9
Acacia polycantha	40.8	59.2	46.3	53.7	31.1	68.9	39.5	60.4	47.0	53.1	3.7	96.3	15.2	84.8	2.4	97.6	0.0	100.0	8.7	91.3
Mangifera indica	99.0	1.0	35.5	64.5	24.9	75.1	44.1	55.9	48.6	51.4	2.5	97.5	16.1	83.9	3.0	97.0	0.3	99.8	53.2	46.8
Psidium guajava	98.3	1.7	35.7	64.3	26.8	73.2	45.8	54.2	47.6	52.4	2.8	97.2	14.2	85.8	2.0	97.0	0.3	99.8	32.8	67.2
Carica papaya	93.0	7.0	34.4	65.6	26.6	73.4	46.8	53.2	46.5	53.5	3.8	96.2	16.1	83.9	3.8	96.2	0.3	99.7	32.1	67.9
Citrus sinensis	93.8	6.2	34.5	65.5	26.5	73.5	48.0	52.0	46.4	53.6	5.6	94.4	14.3	85.7	3.2	96.8	0.3	99.7	28.6	71.4
Prunus Persia	24.6	75.4	45.5	54.6	30.3	69.7	54.6	45.5	31.3	68.7	4.0	96.0	10.1	89.9	1.0	99.0	2.0	98.0	1.0	99.0
Average	65.8	34.3	42.7	57.3	26.3	74.5	42.0	57.7	44.6	55.4	3.5	96.4	15.5	84.6	2.5	97.3	0.5	99.5	24.0	76.1
Note: Gvt = government extension officers; NGO = non-govermental organization extension agents; CBFA = Community-Based Farmer Advisor also known as community based field facilitators or lead farmers; TV = television

Adoption of MPTS

The study examined the adoption of MPTS where adoption was captured in two ways: as the number of farmers with at least any of the MPTS and tree density given as the count of MPTS trees per unit area of land. Using tree density as a measure of adoption is advantageous because it concurrently shows two decisions: a decision to adopt and the intensity of adoption for the MPTS. Tree density is also a measure of species abundance/richness (Erskine et al., 2006). The adoption results are presented in Fig. 1 (number of adopters) and Fig. 2 (count of MPTS per acre). On average 24.0% of the respondents had adopted at least one type of MPTS in the study area (Fig. 1). Among the studied species, Mangifera indica, Senna spectabilis, Psidium guajava, and Carica papaya had high adoption rates, at 53.2%, 51.0%, 32.8%, and 32.1% respectively. These trees appear to be popular choices among the households, reflecting their perceived benefits or suitability for various purposes. Prunus Persia had an extremely low adoption rate, with only 1% of the households adopting it. Generally, the reasons for low adoption rate of MPTS such as Prunus Persia could be attributed to factors such as limited familiarity, lack of knowledge about its benefits, or unsuitability for the intended purposes. Fisher et al. (2018) observed that increased awareness of sustainable farming practices and their positive environmental impacts significantly influenced farmers' adoption decisions. The study found that farmers who were exposed to comprehensive awareness programs, including workshops, community discussions, and information sessions, were more likely to adopt MPTS as part of their agricultural strategies. These findings underscore the importance of targeted awareness campaigns to promote wider and more effective adoption of MPTS among farmers.

Using tree density as an alternative indicator for measuring MPTS adoption the results indicate that Gliricidia sepium, and Leucaena leucocephala, exhibit high tree densities of 64 and 48 trees per acre, respectively, followed by Acacia polycantha at 39 trees per acre and Senna spectabilis with 38 trees per acre. These tree species are popular for soil improvement, fodder production, and other agroecological functions. While a relatively high number of farmers indicated to have adopted Carica papaya and mangifera indica, the two MPTS have the lowest tree densities of 4 and 14 trees per acre, respectively. The low tree densities attributed to the subsistence nature of fruit production in the country such that such that farmers tend to manage few fruit trees as the fruits are mainly used for home consumption while a few are sold in local markets. Additionaly, trees are planted haphazardly (integrated with agricultural crops) without following recommended or optimal plant densities. In properly managed multifunctional farms, the integration of tree-crops and agricultural crops follows prescribed spacing between trees and crops to ensure that farm is productive and financially viable.

Determinants of adoption of Multipurpose Tree Species (MPTS)

Ordered probit regression was fit to assess the effect of ICT-enabled information acquisition on the adoption of MPTS. The results presented in Table 3 shows critical factors that drive MPTS adoption, underscoring sources of information and socioeconomic characteristics of households. The results indicate that the use of ICT platforms such as radio, television and whatsapp messenger influenced the adoption for MPTS positively and significant. Face-to-face extension shows that farmer interactions with CBFA or lead farmers also facilitated MPTS adoption

Other factors that influence adoption of MPTS are age, education, and sex of the household head. Increasing farmer’s age is associated with an increased likelihood of adopting MPTS. Education level also significantly influences adoption such that higher education is associated with a greater likelihood of adopting MPTS. Lastly, female farmers are more likely to adopt MPTS compared to their male counterparts. Surprisingly, the effect of government and NGO extension on MPTS adoption is negative contrary to our expectation. The negative effect of extension could be due to limited contacts with farmers since currently extension-farmer ratio is quite high; that is, there are around 1,700 extension workers who serve nearly 4 million farmers translating to about 2500 farmers being assigned to one extension officer, a number that is too high to meet farmers’ extension needs (Ragasa and Niu, 2017).

Table 3

Ordered Probit regression results showing determinants of MPTS adoption
Dependent variable	Coef.	Std. Err.	z	P > z
Household characteristics
Respondent sex (1 = Female)	0.43	0.17	2.49	0.01*
Age of respondent	0.03	0.01	3.19	0.00**
Education	0.11	0.04	2.95	0.00**
Total landholding size	0.03	0.08	0.31	0.76
In-person extension
Government extension workers	-0.04	0.01	-5.14	0.00***
Non-government organization (NGO)	-0.28	0.02	-10.92	0.00***
CBFA or lead farmer	0.05	0.01	7.20	0.00***
ICT sources of information
Radio	0.05	0.01	4.06	0.00***
Television	0.11	0.03	3.65	0.00***
WhatsApp messenger	0.12	0.02	5.70	0.00***
Mobile Phones call or SMS	0.07	0.06	1.11	0.27
Cut1	1.61	0.50		0.63
Cut2	2.41	0.51		1.41

Note: The reference (base) category is farmers who adopted \(\leqslant 10\) trees per acre on their farm

Awareness with MPTS

Farmers showed high level of awareness for some MPTS, such as Mangifera indica, Psidium guajava, Carica papaya, and Citrus sinensis when compared to Gliricidia sepium, Leucaena leucocephala, and Prunus Persica. The observed variations in awareness levels regarding different tree species, as evident in Table 2, can be attributed to a range of influencing factors. Firstly, when tree species are commonly found and consumed in local areas, farmers naturally become more aware about them through regular exposure. Secondly, the mix of practical functions (benefits derived from the tree), for example, income generation and potential to use for plant medicine and or local cuisines motivate farmers to learn more about these tree species, thereby increasing their awareness about both their availability and importance in the rural economy. Thus, the familiarity and frequent interaction with these trees might naturally lead to heightened awareness among farmers. For instance, studies have indicated that Mangifera indica, holds a prominent cultural significance besides its economic importance in terms of fruit production and trade (Singh et al. 2013). Similarly, Psidium guajava, or guava, has been a staple in many tropical diets and traditional medicinal practices, leading to its well-recognized status among farming communities (Johns & Maundu, 2006). Carica papaya, is celebrated for its nutritional and medicinal properties, making it a familiar and valued species for farmers (Alara et al. 2020). Citrus sinensis, encompassing various orange cultivars, has a global reputation for its citrus fruit production and consumption, making its significance in local markets and households (Barbhuiya, 2015). The cumulative impact of these factors contributes to the heightened awareness and preference for these tree species among farmers. Among non-fruit tree species, there is high awareness levels for Senna spectabilis and Faidherbia albida. High awareness for these species could be linked to effective awareness campaigns or targeted dissemination efforts as fertliser trees. These species are widely promoted as part of a suite of fertilizer trees and more likely their efficacy on soil fertility improvement may catch the attention of farmers and (Fleming et al.2019).

Conversely, the relatively lower levels of awareness noted for Gliricidia sepium, Leucaena leucocephala, and Prunus Persica could be due to limited promotional efforts or insufficient dissemination of information or lack of knowledge on the diversity of their functions. These species may not have gained the same level of exposure in agricultural practices or cultural contexts, leading to a gap in farmers' knowledge. Additionally, their potential benefits might not be as widely understood, contributing to the lower awareness levels (Tega and Bojago, 2023). Stakeholders in the agroforestry sector can bridge the knowledge gaps and empower farmers to make informed choices by leveraging effective communication channels such as government extension workers, NGOs, whatsapp video messages and radio broadcasts. In doing so, extension advisory services can unlock the diverse benefits offered by MPTS and, thus agricultural practices can contribute towards greater sustainability and resilience of rural farming families.

Sources of agroforestry information for farmers

Based on the results in Table 2 traditional ICT source (Radio broadcasts) and community-based farmer advisors play a pivotal role in raising awareness about agroforestry technologies due to their accessibility and wide reach. Radio is a common medium, especially in rural areas where modern technologies might be less prevalent. Its auditory nature engages listeners while they go about their daily tasks, making it a convenient and effective platform for disseminating information (Malekani and Mubofu, 2020). Additionally, radio programs can be specifically designed to address local agricultural concerns such as the benefits and methods of cultivating various agroforestry trees, making the programs highly relevant to the target audience. Ardent radio listeners carry a portable radio as they work in their farms in order to be entertained but also never to miss their favourite program(s). These findings are in line with a study by Ragasa et al. (2021), who found that listening to radio program has a consistently positive impact on increasing technological awareness. This is important because traditional extension sources such as, including government extension workers, and Community-Based Farmer Advisor (CBFA) operate on a localized level. However, their hands-on approach associated with face-to-face extension, which often involves workshops, demonstrations, and community engagement, creates a deeper understanding of agroforestry practices. Nonetheless, in contrast to ICT sources, face-to-face extension might face constraints due to geographical barriers. On the other hand, modern ICT sources such as phone communications have limitations such as lack of interactivity and visual aids necessary to effectively convey detailed information about the technology, thereby limiting their impact (Saidu et al., 2017).

Adoption levels of MPTS and key determinants of adoption

The variations in adoption among the studied tree species (Figs. 1 and 2) can be attributed to a combination of factors that influence participants' decisions. There are variations in the adoption rates for different MPTS reflecting farmers’ preferences, competing land uses, or specific ecological requirements (Franzel & Scherr, 2002). Thus, households are making nuanced choices based on a combination of tree-benefits, practicality and suitability. The low adoption rates for certain species such as Prunus Persica can be attributed to factors that limit their adoption; such as limited familiarity (lack of awareness about the benefits) or perceived unsuitability to farmer’s immediate needs. Thus, farmers may be more inclined to opt for familiar technologies. Hence, there is a need to enhance MPTS awareness in order to promote their adoption.

Further, the study showed that factors which positively influence MPTS adoption are community-based farmer advisors and ICT sources such as radio, WhatsApp, and television. ICT-based extension e.g. radio target wide audience, especially in rural and remote areas where access to other forms of information might be limited. Radio and TV offer a platform for experts to share their knowledge, enabling farmers and communities to learn about the economic, environmental, and social advantages of MPTS (Mubofu & Malekani, 2020). Recently, farmers are using WhatsApp groups to exchange experiences, successes, and challenges related to different subjects. Information on agroforestry technologies including farmer managed natural regeneration and MPTS have been shared among WhatsApp groups, which is seen to contribute to the increased adoption of MPTS. For professional or technical information shared via WhatsApp groups experts are involved by generating initial content (eg text, audio or video messages) and during discussions providing expert advice and clarifications thereby enhancing the knowledge of the farmers.

Face-to-face interactions with extension agents (government and NGO) showed impact on adoption. Face-to-face interactions often require a significant investment of time and resources (Oladele, 2011). Organizing workshops, seminars, or training sessions necessitates coordination, logistics, and travel arrangements. These demands can deter both experts and farmers from participating, particularly if they have competing commitments or face logistical challenges. As a result, physical extension is experiencing challenges in disseminating information, especially in geographically dispersed or remote (Oladele, 2011).

Other factors that influence agroforestry adoption are household characteristics especially age, education and sex of household head. Our results show that women farmers are more likely to adopt agroforestry (MPTS) than their male counterparts. This is likely the case because more women than men participate in community programs promoting agroforestry and, in addition, empirical evidence suggests that women exhibit pro-environmental behaviour more than men do (Mohai, 1999; Zelezny et al., 2000; Strapko et al., 2016). In general, women are likely to control commodities that generate lower revenue whereas men control ones that generate high revenues (Kiptot et al 2014).We also find that increasing farmer’s age, which may be linked to their extensive farming experience is associated with an increased likelihood of adopting MPTS. Experienced farmers may have experimented with agroforestry technologies and are certain about their effectiveness in addressing an individual’s felt needs. Our findings are in tandem with most studies which reported that age is positively correlated with adoption of new technologies (Mercer, 2004; Gyau et al. 2014; Beyene et al. 2019; Syano et al. 2022; Zaca et al.2023) but contrasts with a few studies (Neupane et al. 2002; Owombo & Idumah, 2017; Liliane et al. 2020), who found an inverse relationship between adoption and age. In their explanation they argued that older farmers have a shorter planning horizons and, therefore, may be more reluctant to invest in modern agricultural technologies that take a long time before they realize the benefits. Lastly, there is positive relationship between education levels and MPTS adoption, suggesting that educated farmers have greater passion for the environment or they enhanced capacity to understand and implement innovative practices. Education can enhance farmers' ability to assess the benefits of MPTS and adopt them for improved agricultural outcomes. This aligns with the findings of Dhakal et al. (2015) and Tega & Bojago (2023) who reported that better-educated farmers can more easily grasp the benefits of MPTS.

There are widespread efforts promoting agroforestry and other sustainable agricultural practices in developing countries yet there is slow/low adoption of these practices. Recently, there has been a change in the delivery of agricultural extension advisory services in such a way that farmers receive information through a wide range of ICT sources. This study assessed the effect of ICT-enabled knowledge acquisition on the adoption of MPTS. The findings reveal that ICT tools, such as Radio, television and WhatsApp messenger have significant influence on driving MPTS adoption. The findings underscore the pivotal role that modern communication channels play in promoting sustainable agricultural practices. Further, the results show that in terms of face-to-face extension, community-based farmer advisors (lead farmers) also positively influence the adoption of MPTS in Malawi. Lastly, women farmers are more likely to adopt agroforestry (MPTS) than their male counterparts because more women than men participate in community programs which promote agroforestry and, in addition, empirical evidence suggests that women exhibit pro-environmental behavior. The gendered difference in participation in agri-environmental programs could also stem from the fact that women are disproportionately affected by natural-resource scarcity and spend long time fetching firewood and water for the entire family. These findings highlight the need to strengthening use of modern ICT tool to complement human extension in enhancing the adoption of agroforestry technologies. The ICT platforms should be promoted in disseminating technology specific information and knowledge regarding MPTS. Extension workers and agroforestry experts should lead in developing and disseminating appropriate MPTS-related content compatible with different ICT platforms (eg step-by-step guides and video tutorials)

Acknowledgements

We express our appreciation to the Sustainable Food Systems in Malawi (FoodMa) project for funding this study through the trees for better nutrition and health project (T4NH). We also express gratitude to farming households in Bembeke, Mtakataka, Champhira, and Manyamula EPAs for their gracious cooperation during the data collection. We understand that they had many other commitments, yet they generously spared their time for us.

Aker J C (2011) Dial “A” for agriculture: a review of information and communication technologies for agricultural extension in developing countries. Agricultural economics 42(6): 631-647. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2011.00545.x
Alara OR, Abdurahman NH, Alara JA (2020) Carica papaya: comprehensive overview of the nutritional values, phytochemicals and pharmacological activities. Advances in traditional medicine, pp 1-31.
Atangana A, Khasa D, Chang S, Degrande A (2014) Tropical agroforestry (No. 15310). Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer Netherlands.
Bentley JW., Van Mele P, Barres NF, Okry F, Wanvoeke J (2019) Smallholders download and share videos from the Internet to learn about sustainable agriculture. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability. DOI: 10.1080/14735903.2019.1567246
Barbhuiya AR (2015) Evolutionary genetics and conservation of Citrus genetic resources in home gardens in Northeast India (Doctoral dissertation, Concordia University).
Bell M (2015) ICT–Powering behavior change for a brighter agricultural future. Washington DC: USAID/modernizing extension and advisory services (MEAS).
Beyene AD, Mekonnen A, Randall B, Deribe R (2019) Household Level Determinants of Agroforestry Practices Adoption in Rural Ethiopia. Forests, Trees and Livelihoods 28(3): 194-213. https://doi.org/10.1080/14728028.2019.1620137
Chavula HK (2014) The role of ICTs in agricultural production in Africa. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics 6(7): 279-289.
Dhakal A, Cockfield G, Maraseni TN (2015) Deriving an index of adoption rate and assessing factors affecting adoption of an agroforestry-based farming system in Dhanusha District, Nepal. Agrofor syst, 89, 645-661.
Erskine PD, Lamb D, Bristow M (2006) Tree species diversity and ecosystem function: can tropical multi-species plantations generate greater productivity? Forest Ecology and Management 233(2-3): 205-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2006.05.013
Fabregas R, Kremer M, Schilbach F (2019) Realizing the potential of digital development: The case of agricultural advice. Science 366. http://dx.doi. org/10.1126/science.aay3038
Fisher M, Holden ST, Thierfelder C, Katengeza SP (2018) Awareness and adoption of conservation agriculture in Malawi: what difference can farmer-to-farmer extension make? International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability 16(3): 310-325. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2018.1472411
Fleming A, O’grady AP, Mendham D, England J, Mitchell P, Moroni M, Lyons A (2019) Understanding the values behind farmer perceptions of trees on farms to increase adoption of agroforestry in Australia. Agronomy for sustainable development 39(1): 9.
Franzel S, Scherr SJ (2002) Introduction. In: Franzel S, Scherr SJ (eds) Trees on the farm: assessing the adoption potential of agroforestry practices in Africa. CABI, Wallingford, pp 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851995618.0037
Garrity D (2004) Agroforestry and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. Agrofor Syst 61:5-17.
Gyau A, Smoot K, Kouame C, Diby L, Kahia J, Ofori D (2014) Farmer attitudes and intentions towards trees in cocoa (Theobroma cacao L.) farms in Côte d’Ivoire. Agrofor syst 88: 1035-1045.
Jerneck A, Olsson L (2013) More than trees! Understanding the agroforestry adoption gap in subsistence agriculture: insights from narrative walks in Kenya. J Rural Stud 32:114-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2013.04.004
Johns T, Maundu P (2006) Forest biodiversity, nutrition and population health in market-oriented food systems. UNASYLVA-FAO-57(2): 34.
Jose S (2009) Agroforestry for ecosystem services and environmental benefits: An overview. Agrofor. Syst 76: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-009-9229-7
Kerr J, Milne G, Chhotray V, Baumann P, James AJ (2007) Managing watershed externalities in India: Theory and practice. Environment, development and sustainability 9: 263-281.
Khatri ND, Paudel D, Bhusal P, Ghimire S, Bhandari B (2023) Determinants of farmers’ decisions to adopt agroforestry practices: insights from the Mid‑hills of Western Nepal. Agroforestry Systems 97:833–845 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-023-00830-6
Kiptot E, Hebinck P, Franzel S, Richards P (2007) Adopters, testers or psedo-adopters? Dynamics of the use of improved tree fallows by farmers in western Kenya. Agric Syst 94:509-519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2007.01.002
Kiptot E, Franzel S, Degrande A (2014) Gender, agroforestry and food security in Africa.
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 6:104-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.10.019
Kwesiga F, Akinnifesi FK, Mafongoya PL, McDermott M.H, Agumya A (2003) Agroforestry research and development in Southern Africa during the 1990s: review and challenges ahead. Agrofor Syst 59:173–186
Larochelle C, Alwang J, Travis E, Barrera VH, Dominguez Andrade JM (2017) Did You Really Get the Message? Using Text Reminders to Stimulate Adoption of Agricultural Technologies, Journal of Development Studies, DOI: 10.1080/00220388.2017.1393522
Liliane M, Ezekiel N, Gathuru G (2020) Socio-economic and institutional factors affecting smallholder farmers to adopt agroforestry practices in southern province of Rwanda. International Journal of Agricultural Science and Food Technology 6(1): 068-074.
Long JS, Freese J (2001) Regression models for categorical dependent variables using STATA. Stata Press
Lwesya F, Kibambila V (2017) The role of ICT in facilitating farmers’ accessibility to extension services and marketing of agricultural produce: The case of Maize in Mbozi District, Tanzania. International Journal of Agricultural Marketing 4(2): 142-151.
Meijer SS, Catacutan D, Ajayi OC, Sileshi GW, Nieuwenhuis M (2015) The role of knowledge, attitudes and perceptions in the uptake of agricultural and agroforestry innovations among smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. International journal of agricultural sustainability 13(1): 40-54. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735903.2014.912493
Mercer DE (2004) Adoption of agroforestry innovations in the tropics: a review. Agrofor syst 61: 311-328.
Mubofu C, Malekani A (2020) Agricultural information sources, channels and strategies for sharing agricultural research findings among farmers in Iringa district in Tanzania. Libr. Philos. Pract, pp 1-14.
Neupane RP, Sharma KR, Thapa GB (2002) Adoption of agroforestry in the hills of Nepal: a logistic regression analysis. Agric syst 72(3): 177-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-521X(01)00066-X
Oladele OI (2011) Effect of information communication technology on agricultural information access among researchers, extension agents, and farmers in south western Nigeria. Journal of agricultural & food information 12(2): 167-176. https://doi.org/10.1080/10496505.2011.563229
Owombo PT, Idumah FO (2017) Determinants of agroforestry technology adoption among arable crop farmers in Ondo state, Nigeria: an empirical investigation. Agrofor Syst 91: 919-926.
Mohai P (1992) Men, women, and the environment: An examination of the gender gap in environmental concern and activism. Society & Natural Resources 5:1-19.
Strapko N, Hempel L, MacIlroy K, Smith K (2016) Gender differences in environmental concern: Reevaluating gender socialization. Society & natural resources 29(9): 1015-1031. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2016.1138563
Pattanayak SK, Mercer DE, Sills E, Yang JC (2003) Taking stock of agroforestry adoption studies. Agrofor Syst 57:137-150
Pretty JN, Williams S, Toulmin C (2012) Sustainable intensification: increasing productivity in African food and agricultural systems. Routledge.
Ragasa C, Mzungu D, Kalagho K, Kazembe C (2021) Impact of interactive radio programming on agricultural technology adoption and crop diversification in Malawi. Journal of Development Effectiveness 13(2): 204-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/19439342.2020.1853793
Ragasa C, Niu C (2017) The State of Agricultural Extension and Advisory Services Provision in Malawi: Insights from Household and Community Surveys. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). Washington, D.C. http://ebrary.ifpri.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15738coll2/id/131093. Accessed 31 October 2023
Saidu A, Clarkson AM, Adamu SH, Mohammed M, & Jibo I (2017) Application of ICT in agriculture: Opportunities and challenges in developing countries. International Journal of Computer Science and Mathematical Theory 3(1): 8-18.
Sanchez PA (1995) Science in agroforestry. Agrofor Syst 30:5-55.
Shiferaw BA, Okello J, Reddy RV (2009) Adoption and adaptation of natural resource management innovations in smallholder agriculture: reflections on key lessons and best practices. Environment, development and sustainability 11: 601-619.
Sileshi GW, Mafongoya PL, Akinnifesi FK, Phiri E, Chirwa P, Beedy T, Makumba W, Nyamadzawo G, Njoloma J, Wuta M, Nyamugafata P, Jiri O (2014) Agroforestry: Fertilizer Trees. Encyclopedia of Agriculture and Food Systems 1: 222-234.
Singh Z, Singh RK, Sane VA, Nath P (2013) Mango-postharvest biology and biotechnology. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 32(4): 217-236. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352689.2012.743399
Spielman D, Lecoutere E, Makhija S, Van Campenhout B (2021) Information and Communications Technology (ICT) and Agricultural Extension in Developing Countries. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 13:177–201. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-resource-101520- 080657
Swamila M, Philip D, Akyoo AM, Manda J, Mwinuka L, Smethurst PJ, Kimaro AA (2021) Profitability of gliricidia-maize system in selected dryland areas of Dodoma region, Tanzania. Sustainability 14(1): 53. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010053
Syano NM, Nyangito MM, Wasonga OV, Kironchi G (2022) Agroforestry practices and factors influencing their adoption by communities in the drylands of Eastern Kenya. Agrofor Syst 96(8): 1225-1235.
Tega M, Bojago E (2023) Determinants of smallholder farmers' adoption of agroforestry practices: Sodo Zuriya District, southern Ethiopia. Agrofor Syst, pp 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-023-00885-5
Thapa D, Sæbø Ø (2014) Exploring the link between ICT and development in the context of developing countries: A literature review. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries 64(1): 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1681-4835.2014.tb00454.x
Zaca FN, Ngidi MSC, Chipfupa U, Ojo TO, Managa LR (2023) Factors Influencing the Uptake of Agroforestry Practices among Rural Households: Empirical Evidence from the KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa. Forests 14(10): 2056. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14102056
Zelezny LC, Chua PP, Aldrich C (2000) Elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism. Journal of social issues 56:443-458. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00177

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Journal Publication

published 03 Jul, 2024

Read the published version in Agroforestry Systems →

Editorial decision: Revision requested
06 May, 2024
Reviews received at journal
02 Apr, 2024
Reviewers agreed at journal
23 Mar, 2024
Reviewers invited by journal
03 Jan, 2024
Editor assigned by journal
20 Nov, 2023
Submission checks completed at journal
11 Nov, 2023
First submitted to journal
10 Nov, 2023

You are reading this latest preprint version

Can ICT-enabled knowledge acquisition bridge the gap in enhancing the adoption of multipurpose agroforestry tree species (MPTS) in Malawi?

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Methodology

Study area

Data analysis

Results

Farmer’s awareness about MPTS and information sources

Adoption of MPTS

Determinants of adoption of Multipurpose Tree Species (MPTS)

Note: The reference (base) category is farmers who adopted \(\leqslant 10\) trees per acre on their farm

Discussion

Awareness with MPTS

Sources of agroforestry information for farmers

Adoption levels of MPTS and key determinants of adoption

Conclusions and recommendations

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Journal Publication

Version 1