• Login
    • Login
    Advanced Search
    View Item 
    •   Maseno IR Home
    • Journal Articles
    • School of Agriculture and Food Security
    • Department of Applied Plant Science
    • View Item
    •   Maseno IR Home
    • Journal Articles
    • School of Agriculture and Food Security
    • Department of Applied Plant Science
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Participatory evaluation of integrated pest and soil fertility management options using ordered categorical data analysis

    Thumbnail
    View/Open
    Participatory_evaluation_of_integrated_p.pdf (479.9Kb)
    Publication Date
    2010-06-01
    Author
    Groote, Hugo D
    Rutto, Esther
    Odhiambo, George
    Kanampiu, Fred
    Khan, Zeyaur
    Coe, Richard
    Vanlauwe, Bernard
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract/Overview
    Maize is becoming the major food crop around Lake Victoria. Major constraints to its production are Striga, stem borer, and declining soil fertility. Innovative integrated technologies have been developed: the ‘push–pull’ system (intercropping with Desmodium and surrounded by Napier grass), soybean and Crotalaria rotations, and imidazolinone-resistant (IR) maize seed. In 12 demonstration trials in four villages in Siaya and Vihiga districts (Kenya) and two villages in Busia (Uganda) in 2003 and 2004, 504 farmers evaluated all cropping systems and a mono-cropped continuous maize, each cropped with IR or local maize, and supplemented or not with fertilizer, totaling 16 treatments. Farmers evaluated all treatments for yield, resistance to Striga and stem borer, improvement of soil fertility, and provided an overall evaluation score, using an ordered scale of 1 (very poor) to 5 (very good). Data were analyzed using ordinal regression, estimating log odds ratios. The results show significant preferences for all treatments over the control. Push-pull with IR and fertilizer had the highest log odds ratio (2.93), so the odds of farmers preferring this treatment are 18.7 times the odds that farmers prefer the control. The odds ratios for the other push-pull combinations were generally highest (9–15), followed by the rotation systems with Crotalaria (3.5–7.0), and soybeans, especially with IR maize and fertilizer (odds ratio of 5.7). In mono-cropping systems, IR maize was only appreciated in combination with fertilizer, and then only in 2004. Push-pull and Crotalaria were more appreciated in 2004 than in 2003. Farmers in Vihiga had a stronger preference for push-pull, and those in Busia for soybean rotations. Significant differences among farmers were observed, but the effects were small. Women appreciated push-pull more than men, while other technologies were gender-neutral. Older farmers were more likely to prefer push–pull and Crotalaria with fertilizer. Livestock ownership was not found to have an effect on technology preferences. Measured yield, stem borer and Striga infestation all had significant but small effects, although their inclusion did not eliminate the treatment effects, indicating that other factors are still important. OLS of the scores for different criteria on the overall score shows yield to be the most important criterion (coefficient of 0.40), followed by soil fertility enhancement (0.25) and Striga resistance (0.13). Labor saving (0.09) and stem borer resistance (0.03) are relatively minor criteria. This research shows that scoring and analysis with ordinal regression is a convenient way to solicit and analyze farmers’ preferences for new technologies, with wide applicability in farming systems and participatory research. Its application here shows that farmers like the new technologies, especially push-pull, but that there are substantial differences between years, sites and farmers. The use of this method can be very helpful to define and focus further research and formulate specific and targeted recommendations for agricultural extension.
    Permalink
    https://repository.maseno.ac.ke/handle/123456789/560
    Collections
    • Department of Applied Plant Science [91]

    Maseno University. All rights reserved | Copyright © 2022 
    Contact Us | Send Feedback

     

     

    Browse

    All of Maseno IRCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    View Usage Statistics

    Maseno University. All rights reserved | Copyright © 2022 
    Contact Us | Send Feedback