from the editor’s desk - connecting repositories · evaluated from which the advantages and...

Chief Editor

Of late, there is a general concern that public extension is not doing enough and is notalways relevant in many developing countries. Bureaucratic inefficiency and poor planning& implementation of extension programmes have been the major contributing factors,besides decreasing donor support and staff shortages.

A recent World Bank publication on ‘Agricultural Extension — Generic Challenges andSome Ingredients for Solutions’ has expressed serious concerns over the plight of publicextension. In Asia, the growth rate fostered by the green revolution has slowed down andagriculture is facing a crisis in many parts of the developing world. In this context,agricultural extension faces two major challenges – information & organization andextension funding & delivery.

As for the former challenge, extension has an important role to play in providingimproved skills, information, and ideas in order to develop an agriculture that will meetcomplex demand patterns, reduce poverty, and preserve or enhance ecological resources.

As for the latter challenge, the major difficulties in extension funding and delivery facehappen to be:

• problems in establishing the cause & effect necessary to obtain political and financialsupport and

• liability for public service functions beyond agricultural knowledge and informationtransfer

While seeking immediate solutions to these problems, the policymakers in developingcountries such as India have difficult choices to make on what public extension shoulddo. They may have to look for viable alternatives to public financing by involving theprivate sector, local authorities and producer groups. Eventually, I am sure, they mayhave to involve a variety of stakeholders in forging contracts and collaborative partnerships,pluralistic arrangements have the potential to help resolve these issues.

This issue of JEE contains papers on a variety of topics such as constraints in adoptingeco-friendly conservation practices, how agricultural students perceive the instructionalmethods and on working conditions of women journalists. I hope the JEE readers findthem interesting.

FROM THE EDITOR’S DESK

The Journal of Extension Education published quarterly by the Extension EducationSociety accepts articles of interests representing original work, analytical paper andpaper based on review of extensive literature in the field of Extension Education.

Invariably all the authors of article should be the members/subscribers (annual /life)of the Journal of Extension Education.

The articles should be in the format of a brief abstract, introduction, methodology,findings and discussion, conclusion and references.

The matter should be typewritten, double spaced with a hard copy print out induplicate and a CD in MS-Word.

To protect the anonymity during the review process, the authors are advised not toidentify themselves in the manuscript. Instead, a separate page including names ofthe author(s) and appropriate biographical information as well as the title of themanuscript has to be attached.

The presentation of the subject should be simple, lucid and logical with appropriateheadings, subheadings etc., confirmation to the accepted standards of communication.

Figures, charts, graphs, models etc., if any, should be prepared and to be sent in a CD.

Tables should be clearly typed with double spacing and presented on separate sheets.

The full list of references should be given in alphabetical order with the author’s namefollowed by the year of publication in parentheses, title of the article and the titles ofbooks and journals underlined.

Articles are accepted with the understanding that they have not been publishedeither in full / summary form or sent for publication elsewhere.

Page printing charges: All the authors whose papers accepted for publication arerequired to pay page printing charges. The rate list of page printing charges will besupplied to authors along with the acceptance letters.

Membership particulars:

1. Life Member (7 Years) - Individual : Rs.4000.00 160$2. Annual Member - Individual : Rs.750.00 50$

Single copy : Rs.150.00 20$Annual Subscription - Other faculty

members : Rs.750.00 50$Institution : Rs.5000.00 200$Jan - Dec

JOURNAL OF EXTENSION EDUCATIONNOTES FOR CONTRIBUTORS

RESEARCH ARTICLE

1. Factors Influencing Farmers Decision in Rainfed AreasP.L. Manohari and G.R. Desai 5477

2. Reasons for Resorting to Organic Farming and Advantages Perceivedby the Organic FarmersM. Elavarasi and K.A. Ponnusamy 5485

3. Constraints in the Adoption of Eco Friendly Conservation PracticesL. Murali Krishnan, H. Philip, M. Chinnadurai and V. Ravichandren 5494

4. Issues and Preferences of Horticulture FarmersR. Venkattakumar and B. Narayanaswamy 5499

5. Knowledge of Precision Farming BeneficiariesA.V. Greena, S. Kalaivani and S. Palaniswamy 5506

6. Perception of Under Graduate Students (B.Sc.Agriculture)on Instructional MethodsO.R. Sulaja 5511

7. Socio-Economic Profiling of Tribal Dairy Farmers in NorthernHills Zone of ChhattisgarhP. Mooventhan, K.S. Kadian, R. Senthilkumar and C. Karpagam 5517

8. Women Journalists Working Conditions and Their Suitabilityin the MediaR. Sasikala 5524

Journal of Extension EducationVol. 27 No. 3, 2015

CONTENTS

Journal of Extension Education


Factors Influencing Farmers Decission in Rainfed Areas

P.L. Manohari1 and G.R. Desai2

ABSTRACTThe study was undertaken to understand the different production factors affecting

decision making process of the farmers in rainfed areas of ten states in India. From eachstate 40 farmers were selected from the lowest rainfall raining areas as respondents.Data were collected using specially designed structured pretested schedule. The resultsshow that in rainfed areas majority of the farmers considered factors related to inputsalong with other factors viz., risk bearing ability, agro-climatic conditions and marketsituation for taking divisions in Agricultural production.

1-Assistant Director, National Institute of Agrl.Extension Management, Rajendra Nagar, Hyderabad and 2- FormerDirector (ODPC) MANAGE, Hyderabad.

Rainfed Crops are prone to breaks in themonsoon during the crop growth due to waterstress. This water stress may be due tovariability of rainfall, delay in sowing, diversityin crop management practice and variabilityof the soil type. The prolonged breaks canresult in partial or complete failure of thecrops.

In the resource constrained and dry areas,the farming is a survival mechanism ratherthan a growth oriented activity. Still farmersuse to take many decisions like selection ofinputs (seeds, fertilizers, and pesticides),marketing, processing etc. for bringingagricultural production. Successful farmmanagement depends on farmer’s ability totake correct decisions. There are so manyalternatives available to the farmers. Beforemaking decisions all alternatives should beevaluated from which the advantages anddisadvantages are known. It helps to makethe best decisions. Situation specific Decision-making has becoming more complicated for

the farmers with the locally availableinformation. Certain factors are influencingin selecting the best among the differentalternatives.

An attempt was made in the study tounderstand the factors that influencedfarmers decision making in relation to thechoice of crops, cropping pattern, enterprises,investments to be made etc. Keeping thesituation in view the present study was takenup with the following objectives.

1) To understand the different productionfactors affecting decision makingprocess of the farmers in rain fed areas.

2) To observe the risk bearing ability ofthe farmers.

3) To know the extent of utilization of farmmachinery in rainfed areas.

METHODOLOGY

Ex-post -Facto Research Design wasfollowed. The study was carried out in 10

Journal of Extension Education5478

states since many developmental activitieshave been undertaken in all the areas over aperiod of time. One district representing thelower levels of irrigated area in the state wasselected randomly from among the districtswith lower rainfall in each state. From eachdistrict one block with lowest rainfall wasselected. Two villages from each block wasselected comprising of 20 villages for thestudy. From each one of the villages, fourcategories of the farmers were selectedrepresenting marginal, small, medium andlarge holding categories. Five farmers fromeach of the categories were selected on arandom sampling basis. In all 20 farmers fromeach village comprising 400 farmers wereincluded in the study. The data were collectedby using a specially designed structured pretested schedule. Interview method wasadopted to collect the primary data from thefarming community. For collecting the data,various institutions were involved incollaboration viz., State AgriculturalUniversities, ICAR Institutes, StateDepartment of Agriculture and NGOs indifferent states. The data collected have beenanalyzed by using means and percentages.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

The results and discussions pertaining tothe factors influencing farmer’s decisions inRain fed Areas were presented below.

1. Andhra Pradesh

The factors influencing farmer’s decisions

in agriculture in Andhra Pradesh state arepresented below.

A perusal of the table 1 indicates thatthe major factors influencing decision makingwere found to be the availability of labour (78%) followed by irrigation potential (63 %),home needs (56 %) , market situation (55 %)and availability of credit (27.8 %). A similarpattern of factors was found among most ofthe indicators. However, in the case ofmarginal farmers, the home needs were foundto be a crucial factor among only 33 % of thecommunity. This was possibly seen sincethese farmers being marginal had also theaccess to other supplies through the publicdistribution system at a cheaper cost, hence,could meet their home requirements.

Any further intervention for improving thefarmer’s situation should take into accountthat the factors considered by the farmers arecrucial to take up decisions. The situationdemands promotion of labour saving devicesso that availability of labour may not act as amajor factor to influence adoption decisions.Similar is the case with credit, markets etc.which can help to improve the risk bearingability of the farmers and influence fasterdecision making in favour of improvedtechnologies.

2. Gujarat

Availability of irrigation, seeds and labourwere found to be crucial to decide the type oftechnology being followed by the farmingcommunity. Apart from this, the soil type and

5479Factors Influencing Farmers Decission in Rainfed Areas

fertility was also considered by the farmers.Since, the first three factors are managementrelated it would be necessary to create an

appropriate infrastructure for regular supplyof these inputs so that they do not affect thedecision making among the farmingcommunities.

Table 1. Factors Influencing Farmers' Decisions in Andhra Pradesh

Sl.No. Factors Category of farmers (%) AverageMarginal Small Medium Large

1 Availability of Labour 78 64 80 90 78.0

2 Availability of Irrigation 67 55 70 60 63.0

3 Availability of Credit 33 18 30 30 27.8

4 Availability of Animal labour - - 10 10 5.0

5 Availability of Machinery - - - 10 2.5

6 Crop varieties and their duration 11 - - - 2.8

7 Home needs 33 73 70 50 56.5

8 Market situation 56 45 80 40 55.3

9 Agro climatic conditions - - 20 - 5.0

10 Availability of seeds - 18 20 - 9.5

11 Availability of Fertilizers - - 10 20 7.5

12 Risk bearing ability 44 64 50 70 57.0

n = 40

Table 2. Factors Influencing Farmers’ Decisions in Himachal Pradesh

Sl.No. Factors Category of farmers (%) AverageMarginal Small Medium Large

1 Availability of Labour 100 87 89 100 94.0



4 Availability of Animal labour 67 80 78 100 81.3

5 Availability of Machinery 25 20 11 - 14.0

6 Crop varieties and their duration 42 93 78 75 72.0

7 Home needs 92 93 89 100 93.5


9 Agro climatic conditions 33 13 56 25 31.8

10 Soil type and fertility 83 87 89 50 77.3

11 Availability of Seeds 75 80 89 100 86.0

12 Availability of Fertilizers 17 53 56 100 56.5


n = 40


3. Himachal Pradesh

Many factors influence the decision makingof the farmers. Some important factors arementioned in Table 2.

It could be observed from the below tablethat the crucial factors influencing farmer’sdecision making irrespective of the categoryof farmer was the home needs. Farming

Table 3. Factors Influencing Farmers’ Decisions in Madhya Pradesh

Sl.No. Factors Category of farmers (%)Average

Marginal Small Medium Large1 Availability of Labour 86 100 100 100 96.5



5 Availability of Machinery 71 91 78 100 85


7 Home needs 86 100 78 92 89

8 Market situation 86 100 78 92 89

9 Agro climatic conditions 86 100 78 100 91




13 Risk bearing ability 29 64 33 62 47

14 Others - - - 8 26

n = 40

activity is being undertaken by the farmer tomeet the personal needs of the farm family.This was followed by availability of majorresources like labour, seeds, fertilizers etc.The third set of factors relate to naturalconditions such as soil type with fertility andagro climatic situations. The fourth one relatesto risk bearing ability of the farmers. However,the crucial factors seem to be family needs,availability of inputs.

4. Karnataka

Major factors influencing the farmdecisions by the farmers were availability of

labour, irrigation, credit, machinery, animallabour, seeds apart from the home needs. Thefarmers in the rainfed areas seem to beoperating not only on the uncertainties of therainfall but also the uncertainties of the inputsupplies during the needed times. Hence,there seems to be an uncertain start for thefarming activity, this reveals lack ofmanagement of supplies and planning by theconcerned. Hence it is necessary to develop asystem of formulating a development strategydocument incorporating needs of all thefarmers for the district that could besupported by each actor.


Table 4. Factors Influencing Farmers’ Decisions in Orissa


Marginal Small Medium Large1 Availability of Labour 62 57 100 - 73.0

2 Availability of Irrigation 100 100 100 - 100.0

3 Availability of Credit 75 71 100 - 82.0

4 Crop varieties and their duration 31 7 - - 12.7

5 Home needs 56 64 20 - 46.7

6 Market situation 25 100 100 - 75.0

7 Agro climatic conditions 38 43 60 - 47.0

8 Soil type and fertility 38 - - - 12.7

9 Availability of Seeds 56 64 20 - 46.7

10 Availability of Fertilizers 25 - - - 8.3

n = 40

5. Madhya Pradesh

Various factors influence the decisionmaking at farm level. An attempt was madein the study to understand the factors thatfarmers use to make their decisions.

The information in table 3 reveals thatavailability of various inputs such as seeds,fertilizers, labour, irrigation, credit have beenone of the key sources for the farmers toundertake decisions for crop production apart

Table 5. Factors Influencing Farmers’ Decisions in Rajasthan


Marginal Small Medium Large1 Availability of Labour - 64 11 55 32.5


3 Availability of Credit 11 - 11 9 7.8

4 Availability of Machinery 67 91 89 73 80.0


6 Home needs 100 73 89 82 86.0






12 Risk bearing ability 11 - 22 9 10.5

n = 40


from the requirements from the home front tomeet the home needs. The second type offactors were to agro climatic conditions, cropsand their duration, market situation and soilsand soil fertility. The third type of factor wasrisk bearing ability of the farming community.Since most of the factors indicated by thefarmers are manageable within the capacitiesof the delivery systems, it is necessary thatthe support systems for agricultural

development are streamlined so that farmersdo not feel a constraint in taking farmdecisions at their level.

6. Orissa

Many factors influence the productiondecisions being taken by the farmers. Anattempt was made in the study to identify thefactors being considered by the farmers.

Table 6. Factors Influencing Farmers' Decisions in Tamil Nadu





4 Availability of Machinery - 8 18 29 13.8


6 Home needs 40 42 55 29 41.5






12 Risk bearing ability 20 - 9 - 7.3

n = 40

The results table 4 indicate that farmdecisions were mainly influenced by theavailability of the inputs such as irrigation,credit, market situations, labour, seeds andfertilizers. Nearly half of the farmers wereinfluenced by the home needs.

7. Rajasthan

Farm decision making is influenced byvarious factors for the rain fed farmers.

The data presented in table 5 highlightsthat meeting home needs was found to be acrucial factor among all the farmers. This wasfollowed by the availability of animal labourand machinery being crucial to undertake anyagricultural activity. The other importantfactors influencing farm decision making werethe market situation and the availability ofirrigation. Apart from this, availability ofinputs and the risk bearing ability of the


farmers were found to influence quick decisionmaking among the farmers.

8. Tamil Nadu

Many factors influence the farm decisionmaking by the farmers in rain fed areas.

The results in table 6 highlight theavailability of irrigation and credit as thecrucial factors influencing in more than 80 %of the cases followed by agro climaticconditions, availability of labour, seeds andmarket situation. The third set of factorsinfluencing farm decisions were soil type andfertility, crop duration and availability offertilizer. However, home needs were foundto be crucial among 40 – 55 % among differentcategories of farmers.

9. Uttar Pradesh

The table 7 indicates that the various

factors considered by the farmers in takingdecisions relating to farming activity.

It could be observed from the table thatthe availability of irrigation has been a majorfactor in deciding the technology to be usedby the farmers and the cropping pattern. Thisis followed by availability of seeds, soil fertility,availability of labour, risk, home needs,market, credit etc. The crucial factors inmaking decisions relating to farm activity werefound to be home needs, availability of inputsincluding irrigation and labour, marketsituation and the risk involved in undertakingthe activity. Any strategy to improve thefarming systems has to consider the criteriaset by farmers to evaluate their own situations.

10. West Bengal

Farm decision making is influenced by variousfactors among different categories of farmers.

Table 7. Factors Influencing Farmers’ Decisions in Uttar Pradesh n = 40





4 Availability of Machinery 56 33 36 12 34.3


6 Home needs 56 44 50 62 53.0








The major factors influencing were foundto be availability of seeds, labour, machinery,fertilizers etc. 56 % of the farmers indicatedhome needs as a factor influencing farmdecision. Apart from the above factors, agroclimatic situations, market situations, creditavailability, risk bearing ability etc. alsoinfluence the farmers decisions. It could beobserved from the result indicate that themajor factors influencing decisions were theinput availability, home needs apart from agroclimatic situations. Since agro climaticsituations cannot be modified, the possibilityof organizing appropriate input supply andmeeting the home requirements of the farming

community by effective planning process is acrucial requirement in improving the conditionof the rainfed farmers.

CONCLUSION

In rain fed areas farmers considered notonly factors related to inputs but also otherfactors like risk bearing ability, agro climaticconditions & market situations for takingdecisions in Agricultural production. Keepingthis scenario in the view the Agriculture andallied departments including marketing hasto retune their delivery mechanisms forincreasing productivity in rainfed areas.


Reasons for Resorting to Organic Farming and AdvantagesPerceived by the Organic Farmers

M. Elavarasi1 and K.A. Ponnusamy2

ABSTRACTThe study mainly focused on reasons for resorting to organic farming and advantages

and benefits perceived by the organic farmers. The study was conducted in Coimbatore,Erode and Dharampuri districts of Tamil Nadu. A sample of 100 organic farmers were therespondents for the present study. The data were collected from each respondent throughpersonal interview method with the help of interview schedule. The results revealed that,major reasons for resorting to organic farming were premium price ( 75.00%) conservationof environment (72.00%), production of high quality, toxic and pesticide free product (68.00%)and negative experiences face with inorganic farming(50.00%) and perceived benefits oforganic farming were increased soil properties(100.00%), reduced cost on external inputs(82.00%), efficient use of local on- farm resources(77.00%) and water holding capacity ofsoil (75.00%)

1-PG Scholar, Dept. of Agrl.Extension and Rural Sociology, TNAU, Coimbatore- 641 003 and 2 - 3 Professor,Directorate of ODL, TNAU, Coimbatore - 641 003.

In India before 1960, only organic farmingpractice was followed without chemicalfertilizers and pesticides. During late 1960s,there was threaten to food security due topopulation raise and frequent droughts, whichbrought “Green revolution” in our country.Green revolution has ensured food securityto the growing population leading to self-sufficiency in food grain production. Due tointensive agriculture, using high yieldingvarieties, more fertilizers, chemicals andirrigation to increase yields was introduced.Excessive use of chemical fertilizers,pesticides, and herbicides has long lasting anddeterious effects on soil health, soil erosion,pollution of air, effects on environment, reducequality of food produce, consumers ofagricultural produce and increased cost ofcultivation. Therefore we look for organicfarming which is a holistic production

management system that promotes andenhance agro –eco system health, includingbio diversity, biological cycles, and soilbiological activity. Promoting organic farmingpractices among the farming community in alarge scale will be a promising strategy to facethese challenges.

Organic farming is a production systemwhich avoids or largely excludes the use ofsynthetically compound fertilizers, pesticides,growth regulators, genetically modifiedorganism and live stock food additives. To themaximum extent possible organic farmingsystem relies upon crop rotations, use of cropresidues, animal manures, legumes, greenmanures, off farm organic wastes, biofertilizers, mechanical cultivation and aspectof biological control to maintain soilproductivity (Lamkin, 1990)


Organic agriculture in India is beingadopted by farmers for different reasons. Firstcategory of farmers are those who are situatedin no-input or low-input use zones, for themorganic is a way of life and they are doing itas a tradition. Second category of farmers arethose who have recently adopted the organicin the wake of ill effects of conventionalagriculture, may be in the form of reducedsoil fertility, food toxicity or increasing costand diminishing returns. The third categorycomprised of farmers and enterprises whichhave systematically adopted the commercialorganic agriculture to capture emergingmarket opportunities and premium prices.

According to Lukas and Cahn (2008) themajor motivation for the farmers to adoptorganic agriculture was their negativeexperiences with conventional farming, e.g.deteriorating natural assets, continuous pestand disease problems, high costs for externalfarm inputs and health problems that wererelated to the use of pesticides.

According to Food and AgricultureOrganization (2008) organic agriculturepromotes ecological resilience, improvedbiodiversity, healthy management, off-farmsand the surrounding environment, andbuilding on community knowledge andstrength.

According to Adesope et al. (2012) benefitsperceived by the organic farmers were, 41.10%of the respondents perceived that organicfarming practices increased soil organicmatter content, 22.20% perceived that theyreduced input cost of farming, 26.7%

perceived that they involved low risk in cropfailure. Also, 81.10% indicated that it has ahigh social value of general acceptability.About 84.00% indicated that organic farmingpractices are compatible with their owncultural systems, 77.80% stated that they areinexpensive, 55.60% stated that organicfarming practices are natural form of farming,while 22.20% indicated that they areenvironmentally friendly.

Keeping all these facts in mind the presentinvestigation “Reasons for resorting to organicfarming and advantages and benefitsperceived by the organic farmers” wasundertaken.

METHODOLOGY

A diagnostic cum exploratory researchdesign was used for the research study. Basedon interaction with officials from Tamil NaduOrganic Seed Certification Department(TNOCD), Coimbatore and MYRADA KVK,Gobichettipalayam the researcher came toknow that the farmers in the three districts,namely, Coimbatore, Erode and Dharampurihave been successfully practising organicfarming. Moreover organic farming associationhas been functioning effectively inCoimbatore, Erode and Dharampuri. Hencethese three districts were selected. Byreviewing the record and documents fromTNOCD, Coimbatore and MYRADA KVKGobichettipalayam, a list of farmers practisingwas prepared and a total of 100 farmers wereselected and personally interviewed and datawere collected using semi structured interview

5487Reasons for Resorting to Organic Farming and Advantages Perceivedby the Organic Farmers

schedule. Data were analyzed by usingpercentage analysis and the significantfindings are given here under.


Reasons for resorting to organicfarming

The results on reasons for resorting toorganic farming by the farmers are presentedin Table 1.

Premium price

An overview of the data presented in Table1 Indicate that, three-fourth of therespondents (75.00%) resorted towardsorganic farming because of to get high pricepremiums for their farm produces. Thefarmers, who realized the middle man problemunder inorganic system and marketingopportunities under organic farming systemsuch as premium price, demand for healthyfood, marketing trends and export opportunitywould have resorted towards the same. They

(n=100)*

exposed to the existing organic marketingsystem under organic farming in their area.Moreover farmers realized and opined that the

organic product is normally priced 20-30 %higher than a conventional product.

Table 1.Distribution of Respondents According to Reasons for Resorting

to Organic Farming

*Multiple responses obtained

Sl.No. Reasons for resorting to organic farming Number Percentage

1. Premium price 75 75

2. Conservation of environment 72 72

3. Production of high quality, toxic, pesticidefree and nutritious product 68 68

4. Negative experiences face with inorganic farming 50 50

5. To reduce cost of production 44 44

6. Participation in organic farming related training

and field visit 32 32

7. Awareness created through broadcasting program

in mass media and publications such as magazines,

journals and news dailies 22 22

8. Gaining independence and self sufficiency under

organic farming system 18 18


Conservation of environment

Nearly three fourth (72.00%) of therespondents were switched over to organicfarming to conserve environment. Theyexperienced various long lasting effects ofchemical farming in soil, air and water suchas depletion of soil health, loss of soil fertility,increased level of soil PH, reduced populationof microorganism and earth worms, pollutiondue to pesticides and fertilizers, depletion ofground water level and contaminated waterdue to excessive spraying of fertilizers andpesticides which might be influenced them forresorted to organic farming.

Production of high quality, toxic,pesticide residue free and nutritiousproduct

More than half (68.00 %) of the farmersexpressed that they resorted towards organicfarming to produce high quality, toxic,pesticide residue free and nutritious product.They aware about ill effects of chemical foodwhich cause adverse effects on human health.Some farmers perceived that chemical wouldagriculture causes health hazard forthemselves. However, personal health was notthe only reason to convert to organic farming.The farmers who are conscious about theirown health and of their families were morelikely to be considered about their farmworkers as well as consumers health byavoiding contact with toxic inputs andtherefore it might be influenced them forresorting towards the organic farming.

Negative experiences faced withinorganic farming

The farmers who resorted towards theorganic farming as a result of negativeexperiences faced with inorganic farming wereexactly 50.00 per cent. Farmers converted toorganic farming because of uneasinessexperienced, with existing farming systemwhich was predominantly based on chemicals.They experienced various negative experiencesof chemical farming such as continuous pestand disease problem, pest resistance problem,pollution due to fertilizers and pesticides, pestresurgence problem, increased cost ofcultivation, high cost of external farm inputs,reduced food quality and declining yield. As aresult of realizing these long lasting effects ofchemical farming at particular point theyresorted towards organic farming.

To reduce cost of production

Nearly half (44.00%) of the farmers wereresorting towards organic farming in order toreduce the cost of production. They felt thatunder chemical farming system they hadspent more money for purchasing fertilizersand pesticides which increased the cost ofcultivation and also pushed them towardsdept trap, also they aware of organic farmingreduced the cost of cultivation by efficientutilization of local on farm resources. Hencein order to lower the cost of production theymight be resorted towards the organicfarming.


Participation in organic farming relatedtraining and field visit

More than one fourth (32.00%) of thefarmers resorted to organic farming as a resultof participation in organic farming relatedtraining and field visit. They had participatedin different training programmes which wereconducted by Krishi Vigyan Kendra andorganic farmers associations in which theyvisited to other successful organic farmer’sfields and discussed with organic farmers andlearned organic farming technologies whichmight be influenced them for resorting toorganic farming.

Awareness created through broadcastingprogram in mass media and publications suchas magazines and journals

Nearly one fourth (22.00%) of therespondents resorted towards organic farmingas a result of awareness created throughbroadcasting program in mass media andpublications such as magazines, journals andnews dailies.

Gaining independence and selfsufficiency under organic farmingsystem

A very few only 18.00 per cent of therespondents were resorted towards organicfarming to gain independence and to attainself sufficiency. After realizing that everyrequirement of farm should be met out withinthe farm itself and also who expected the finalproduct alone reach the consumer might beresorted towards the organic farming.

Advantages and benefits

The findings related to the advantages andbenefits of organic farming as experienced bythe organic farmers are presented in Table 2.

Soil properties

Improved soil organic matter, soilstructure, soil texture, soil nutrientenhancement, soil microorganisms, microbialactivity, abundance of earthworms andfertility of soil were the major advantages oforganic farming as experienced by all therespondents. They increased the soil organicmatter with the application of vermicompostand manures such as farm yard manure,poultry manure and goat manure. They alsoexpressed that application of various organicamendments like neem seed cake, ground nutcake, coconut cake and illupai cake aremaking the soil more friable. Soil organicmatter contributes to good soil structure, soiltexture and soil nutrient enhancement.

They also expressed that application ofvarious organic inputs such as jeevamruthum, amirtha karaisal, panchakavya,cow dung slurry, humic acid and fish aminoacid at appropriate intervals enhanced the soilnutrients, soil microorganisms, microbialactivity, earthworms and fertility of the soil.

Production of good quality, healthy andtoxic free product

Production of good quality, healthy andtoxic free product were also the majoradvantage of organic farming as experienced


Table 2. Advantages and Benefits of Organic Farming


Sl.No. Advantages experienced Number Percentage

1. Soil properties 100 100

2. Production of good quality, healthy and toxic free product 100 100

3. Longer storability of organic products 94 94

4. Reduced cost on external inputs 82 82

5. Efficient use of local on- farm resources 77 77

6. Water holding capacity of soil 75 75

7. Conservation of environment 71 71

8. High preference by the consumers 68 68

9. Premium price 58 58

10. Balance of pest and predators 55 55

11. Increased yield 54 54

12. Consistency of profit 46 46

13. Preservation of natural agro biodiversity 44 44

(n=100)*

by all the respondents. The farmers expressedthat they have not used any chemicals,fertilizers and pesticides according to thecertification norms hence the organic productalways free from toxic and pesticides residueswhich improved the produce quality. They alsorealized that the quality attributes of productsuch as size, colour, appearance, smell, tasteand nutritive value were found better compareto inorganic product.

Longer storability of organic products

Almost all the respondents (94.00 %) feltthat longer storability of organic products asa major advantage. They felt that keeping

quality, shelf life and storability of organicproducts were more than that of inorganicfarm product.

Reduced cost on external inputs

Reduced cost on external inputs were alsothe major advantage of organic farming asexperienced by 82.00 per cent of therespondents. The farmers reported that theydid not purchased costly organic inputs likegrowth promoters, organic manures andorganic bio pesticides etc., rather they usedself- produced inputs such as seeds, seedtreatment solution like beejamurutha,manures like jeevamruthum, amirtha


karaisal, panchakavya, fish amino acid,effective microorganism and farm yardmanure, botanical formulations like eindhuilai karaisal and agni astram. Hence farmersrealized reduced cost on external inputs asone of the major advantages.

Efficient use of local on- farm resources

Efficient use of local on- farm resourceswere the major advantage of organic farmingas experienced by 77.00 per cent of therespondents. Availability of inputs within theirown field decreased their dependence onborrowings and prevented them from depttrap. They recycled various on farm resourcessuch as cattle shed wastes, cow dung, cowurine, droppings of goats and sheep and fishwastes as a manures and crop wastes suchas, sugar cane trashes, dried leaves, greenmanure, green leaves manure and weeds as amulching material as well as manure. Henceorganic farmers were conscious about theimportance of efficient use of local on farmresources.

Water holding capacity of soil

Water holding capacity of soil was the majoradvantage of organic farming as experiencedby 75.00 per cent of the respondents. Theyexpressed that the mulching with greenmanures, green leaves manures, dried leavesand weeds prevented the entering of sunlightinto the soil and making the soil always withsufficient moisture which improved the waterholding capacity of soil, obviously farmersexperienced these benefit.

Conservation of environment

Conservation of environment was the majoradvantage of organic farming as experiencedby 71.00 per cent of the respondents. Organicfarmers claimed that organic farmingpractices conserved various components ofenvironment like soil, air and water. As theystrictly avoided the spraying of any syntheticchemicals and pesticides it does not pollutesoil, air and water. Hence it will conserveenvironment for future generation also.

High preferences by the consumers

High preferences by the consumers werethe major advantage of organic farming asperceived by 68.00 per cent of therespondents. Farmers opined that afterrealizing the ill effects of consuming chemicalfoods consumers were preferred to buy organicfood products. The growing awareness createdamong the consumers would have providedthe marketing opportunity for organicproducts.

Premium price

Better price for the organic productscompare to market price were the majoradvantage of organic farming as experiencedby 58.00 per cent of the respondents. Thefarmers getting better price for the productcompare to market price. The certified organicfarmers who sold their produces to variousorganic shops were getting premium price atthe rate of 20% more than inorganic farmingproduct also one of the advantages perceivedamong the farmers.


Balance of pest and predators

Balance of pest and predators were themajor advantage of organic farming asexperienced by 55.00 per cent of therespondents. Organic farmers primarystrategy in controlling pest and disease wasprevention of through good plant nutrition andmanagement. They considered pest anddisease are part of nature. They used covercrops and mulching with green manure andgreen leaves manures and effectivelydisrupting habitat of weeds, insects anddisease organism. They also used certainbotanical formulations for control of pests.Avoidance of chemicals and use of alternativeunder organic farming system helps toconserve biodiversity as it encourages anatural balance within the eco system. Theiraim was not to eradicate them altogether.Their aim was nature will take care of it whichrestores natural balance between pest andpredators.

Increased yield

Increased yield was the major advantageof organic farming as experienced by 54.00per cent of the respondents. After experiencingtemporary decreased yield during the initialtransition period the farmers were realizingthe yield was increased.

Consistency of profit

Consistency of profit was the majoradvantage of organic farming as experiencedby 46.00 per cent of the respondents. Farmers

opined that consistency of profit due toresorting towards organic farming wasregular. They have opined that organicfarming did not involved capital investmentas high as that required in chemical farmingwhich reduced that cost of inputs and theirby increasing profit.

Preservation of natural agrobiodiversity

The finding of the present study show that44.00 per cent of the respondents perceivedthat, preservation of natural agro biodiversityas a major advantage of organic farming.

CONCLUSION

The study has shown that the majorreasons for resorting to organic farming werepremium price, conservation of environment,production of high quality, toxic and pesticidefree product, negative experiences faced withinorganic farming, to reduce cost ofproduction, and to gain independence and selfsufficiency under organic farming system. Itwas also found that perceived benefits oforganic farming are increased soil properties,reduced cost on external inputs, efficient useof local on- farm resources, water holdingcapacity of soil, conservation of environmentand premium price. To promote organicfarming, farmers should be given training byemphasizing the advantages of organicfarming. According to Seyed Jamal Hosseiniand Zahara Ajoudani (2012) there is need formore training and education to change the


attitude of farmers and enhance theirconfidence about the role of organic farmingin agriculture. It is also important to developpolicies that benefit small-scale farmers.

REFERENCES

Adesope, O.M., E.C. Matthews, Njoku, N. S.,Oguzor and V.C. Ugwuja. 2012. Effect ofSocio-Economic Characteristics of Farmers onTheir Adoption of Organic Farming Practices.Available at www. intechopen.com

FAO. 2008. Organic Agriculture and Climatechange. Food and Agriculture Organization,Rome.

Lampkin, N.H. 1990. Organic Farming. FarmingPress, Ipswitch, UK. pp.165.

Lukas, M. and M. Cahn. 2008. Organic Agricultureand Rural Livelihoods in Karnataka, India 16thIFOAM Organic World Congress, Modena, Italy,June 16-20, Archived at http://orgprints.org/view/projects/conference.html

Seyed Jamal Hosseini and Zahara Ajoudani. 2012.Affective Factors in Adopting Organic Farmingin Iran. Annals of Biological Research, 3(1):601-608. Available at http://scholarsresearchlibrary.com/archive.html


1-Ph.D., Research Scholar, Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Sociology, TNAU, Coimbatore, 2-Directorof Extension Education, Directorate of Extension Education, TNAU, Coimbatore, 3-Director, CARDS, TNAU,Coimbatore and 4- Dean, Vanavarayar Institute of Agriculture, Pollachi, Coimbatore District.

Constraints in the Adoption of Eco Friendly Conservation Practices

L. Murali Krishnan1, H. Philip2, M. Chinnadurai3 and V. Ravichandren4

ABSTRACTAdoption of Eco Friendly Conservation Practices requires strong attitude and good

knowledge level. Further, the adoption of Eco Friendly Conservation Practices has putfourth many constraints. This study was conducted in The Nilgiris district to assess theconstraints and suggestions to overcome the constraints in the adoption of Eco FriendlyConservation Practices. Thus, to analyse the constraints Garett ranking method was used(Garett, H.E. et al 1973). The study revealed that the constraints of labour scarcity, Lackof skill about the eco friendly conservation practices, lack of credit facilities, high risk,Insect pest and diseases management, Lack of awareness of agro environmental problemsand farmer’s attitude towards the Eco Friendly Conservation Practices are the majorconstraints in the adoption of Eco Friendly Conservation Practices.The study suggestseducational, extension & training strategies for fostering the adopted of ECO friendlyConservation Practices.

The term “sustainability” becomes bothambitious and ambiguous. If the policies onfood security and income generation fail toaddress the environmental conservation in thebiosphere region, majority of the poor farmersthrough the application of eco friendlyconservation practices remain incomplete.(FAO, 2005).

According to Sunitha Varghese (1998)among the constraints, technologicalconstraints, socio-economic, personal,physical and communication constraints inthe adoption of eco-friendly protectiontechnologies. Increased labour and timeinvolvement followed by high risk involvedwere the major technological constraints. Highcost of labour followed by high cost of inputswas the predominant socio-economic

constraints. Major personal constraints werelack of knowledge to identify bio agents andpests and diseases. Labour scarcity, lack oftraining and weak extension programs werethe most seriously felt communicationconstraints.

METHODOLOGY

The Nilgiris district of Tamil Nadu waspurposively selected due to the prevalence ofwide biodiversity. All four blocks was takenfor this study. The samples of 80 farmers wereselected from each block. Totally, 320respondents were selected from the district.The respondents have been selected based onthe simple random sampling technique withthe support of the state department ofagriculture. Post stratification work was done

5495Constraints in the Adoption of Eco Friendly Conservation Practices

to categorize the farmers in to adopters of EcoFriendly Conservation Practices and nonadopters of Eco Friendly ConservationPractices. The data were collected using a pre-tested interview schedule. And, Garett rankingmethod was used to analyse the constraints.

Physical constraints

Table 1 reported that with respect tophysical constraints, the labour scarcity hasemerged as the major constraint with thegarrett score of 71.15 as it was ranked first.This is followed by non-availability of inputshad a garrett score of 60.50 ranked second,poor quality of the inputs with a garrett scoreof 46.73 and ranked third, application ofinputs has a garrett score of 39.73 and rankedfourth and purchase of inputs to the EcoFriendly Conservation Practices with a garrettscore of 30.17 and ranked fifth.

Labour scarcity in agriculture was due tothe non-availability farm labourers in thatarea.

Personal constrsaints

The table 1 infers that among the personalconstraints, lack of skill about eco friendlyconservation practices as the major constraintwith the garrett score of 52.03 and as it wasranked first. This is followed by inability toattend the training programmes had a garrettscore of 51.79 and ranked second and lackof knowledge about Eco Friendly ConservationPractices with a garrett score of 45.30 andranked third.

Most of the farm labours are not practicingskill oriented eco friendly conservationpractices. Promotion of skill oriented trainingprogrammes helps to improve the farmersconfidence in the Eco Friendly ConservationPractices.

Socio-economic constraints

The table 1 indicates that among thesocioe-conomic constraints, high cost oflabour to the Eco Friendly ConservationPractices as the major constraint with thegarrett score of 58.35 as it was ranked first.This is followed by lack of credit facilities hada garrett score of 53.95 and ranked second,high cost of inputs with a garrett score of46.10 and ranked third and lack of price policyhas a garrett score of 42.07 and rankednumber fourth.

High cost of labour was the mainconstraint. Thus, the issues could beaddressed by possible social capital buildingand policy formulation. It will enable thefarmer’s community to tackle the issues ofadoption of Eco Friendly ConservationPractices in a sustainable manner.

Lack of credit facilities was the secondimportant constraint. Separate financialsupport from the government exclusively forEco Friendly Conservation Practices are verymuch essential.

Technical constraints

The table also revealed the technicalconstraints. Among thus, the identified highrisk involved in Eco Friendly Conservation


Sl. No. Constraints Garrett Score RankI Physical constraints1. Labour scarcity 71.15 I2. Non availability of inputs 60.50 II3. Poor quality of inputs 46.73 III4. Application of inputs 39.73 IV5. Purchase of inputs 30.17 VII Personal constraints1. Lack of knowledge about Eco Friendly Conservation Practices 45.30 III2. Lack of skill about Eco Friendly Conservation Practices 52.03 I3. Inability to attend the training programmes 51.79 IIIII Socio-economic constraints1. Lack of credit facilities 53.95 II2. High cost of labour 58.35 I3. High cost inputs 46.10 III4. Lack of price policy for eco friendly agricultural products 42.07 IVIV Technical constraints1. Lack of technical guidance 53.51 II2. High risk involved 55.53 I3. Complexity of tools and techniques 46.96 III4. Lack of easy monitoring method 43.24 IVV Environmental constraints1. Rainfall and other meteorological constraints 45.78 III2. Attack of insect pest and diseases 59.65 I3. Management of pest and diseases 55.44 II4. Soil erosion and drainage 39.55 IVVI Extension constraints1. Lack of awareness of agro environmental problems 58.83 I2. Lack of local technical expertise 56.82 II3. Lack of success stories of Eco Friendly Conservation

Practices adoption 48.62 III4. Lack of demonstrated impacts on Eco Friendly

Conservation Practices 35.38 IVVII Psychological constraints1. Culture 42.52 III2. Attitude 65.10 I3. Perceptions 50.51 II4. Lack of motivation from officials 41.15 IV

Table 1.Major Constraints faced by the Farmers in the Adoption of Eco Friendly Conservation

Practices in The Nilgiris district of Western Ghats

5497Constraints in the Adoption of Eco Friendly Conservation Practices

Practices as the major constraint with thegarrett score of 55.53 as it was ranked first.This is followed by lack of technical guidancehad a garrett score of 53.51 and rankedsecond, complexity of tools and techniqueswith a garrett score of 46.96 and ranked thirdand lack of easy monitoring method observeda garrett score of 43.24 and ranked numberfourth.

Adoption of Eco Friendly ConservationPractices would naturally lower the riskstatus.

Environmental constraints

Attack of insect pest and diseases in EcoFriendly Conservation Practices has emergedas the major constraint with the garrett scoreof 59.65 as it was ranked first. This is followedby management of pest and diseases had agarrett score of 55.44 and ranked second,rainfall and other meteorological constraintshad a garrett score of 45.78 and ranked thirdand lack of easy monitoring method observeda garrett score of 39.55 and ranked fourth.

To address these constraints, planting ofnative species as well as traditional varieties,long duration pest and disease resistancevarieties and application of organic herbalpesticides improves the adoption of EcoFriendly Conservation Practices.

Extension constraints

Among the extension constraints, lack ofawareness of agro environmental problems ineco friendly conservation practices wasidentified the major constraint with the garrett

score of 58.83 as it was ranked first. This isfollowed by lack of local technical expertisehad a garrett score of 56.83 and rankedsecond, lack of success stories in the adoptionof Eco Friendly Conservation Practices witha garrett score of 48.62 and ranked third andlack of demonstrated impacts observed garrettscore of 35.38 and ranked fourth.

Lack of awareness might be due to the poorrecognition of the extension services and lackof sufficient publicity through different media.Thus, the adoption of Eco FriendlyConservation Practices could be achievedthrough Farmer Field Schools and FarmingSystem Research and extension strategies.

Psychological constraints

Among the psychological constraints,farmer’s attitude towards the Eco FriendlyConservation Practices as the majorconstraint with the garrett score of 65.10 asit was ranked first. This is followed byperception of the farmer had a garrett scoreof 50.51 and ranked second, farmers culturein the adoption of eco friendly conservationpractices with a garrett score of 42.52 andranked third and lack of motivation from theofficials observed garrett score of 41.15 andranked fourth.

Farmer’s attitude, perception and culturalconstraints reduces the motivation level fromextension officials.

Thus, psychological mind set of farmersfacilitate adoption of eco friendly conservationpractices. The efforts from extension,research, supply of inputs, marketing agencies


were needed to facilitate the successfuladoption of Eco Friendly ConservationPractices by the farmers.

CONCLUSION

In The Nilgiris district, restriction of thepractices like introduction of high yieldingvarieties, exotic crop varieties, increased useof chemical fertilizers, pesticides andfungicides and identified tillage practiceswhich reduce the considerable damage to thesoil, water and the environment.

Farmers cooperation, cluster approach,participatory farmer first approach, farmingsystems based extension strategy are much

required for successful implementation of theeco friendly conservation practices.

REFERENCES

FAO, 2005. Impact of Climate Change, Pests andDiseases on Food Security and PovertyReduction. Special Event BackgroundDocument for the 31st Session of theCommittee on World Food Security. Rome. 23-26 May.

Garrettt, H.E. and R.S. Woodworth. 1973.Statistics in Psychology and Education. Vakils,Feffer and Simons Private Limited, Bombay.

Sunitha Varghese. 1998. Knowledge and Adoptionof Eco-friendly Farm Technologies in Paddy.Unpub. M.Sc.(Ag.) Thesis, TNAU, Madurai.


Issues and Preferences of Horticulture Farmers

R. Venkattakumar1 and B. Narayanaswamy2

ABSTRACTA National Farmers Meet (NFM) was organized by Indian Council of Agricultural Research

(ICAR) and Tamil Nadu Agricultural University (TNAU) at Regional Research Station (RRS),Paiyur, Tamil Nadu on 14.3.2015. The purpose was to sensitize the farmers about improvedhorticultural production technologies and obtain first-hand information about issues ofhorticulture farmers of Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and Kerala. A brief surveywas conducted at NFM with horticulture farmers as respondents (60) through a structuredquestionnaire. Analysis of the survey data indicated that Mango, Tomato and Marigoldare the major fruit, vegetable and ornamental crops cultivated respectively. Non-availabilityof critical inputs such as fertilizers, seeds/ planting material and lack of remunerativemarket price are the major issues in contemporary horticulture, apart from unawarenesstowards improved horticulture production technologies. Field demonstrations and off-campus training programmes are the two major extension interventions preferred by thehorticulture farmers; whereas mass media channels are preferred as information sourcesapart from institutional sources such as development departments and research institutes.Appropriate extension strategies are suggested based on the findings of the survey.

1-Principal Scientist and Head and 2- Principal Scientist, Division of Extension and Training, ICAR-IIHR, Bengaluru.

The diverse agro-climatic scenario in Indiaenables production of a variety of tropical,sub-tropical and temperate horticulturalcrops, thereby facilitating crop-diversification,employment generation and livelihoodsecurity. The horticulture sector in India is asunrise sector. The growth of this sector isfaster than other sectors in the overallagricultural situation. One of the reasons isthe increasing demand for fresh and processedhorticultural produce from both rural andurban consumers. Horticulture sector in Indiaencompasses production of fruits (32%),vegetables including tubers (60%), plantationcrops (5%), spices (2%), flowers and medicinalplants and aromatic plants (1%). The exportearnings through horticultural products

revolve around Rs.8761 crores (IIHR AnnualReport, 2013-14).

Though India leads in production of manyfruits and vegetables, the productivity of fruits(about 11 tonnes/ha) and vegetables (about17 tonnes/ ha) is less compared to leadingcountries in the world. Amidst suchcircumstances, India aims to double itsproduction of horticultural crops by 2030 tomeet the ever growing demand. Hence, thereis an indispensable need for enhancingproduction and productivity of horticulturalproducts. Enhancing horticultural productionis a factor of transfer of improved horticulturalproduction technologies from researchorganizations to the horticultural farmers andother stakeholders. The transfer of improved


horticultural production technology should beneed-based, aimed at solving thecontemporary issues faced by the horticulturefarmers and match their preferences towardsinformation sources and extensioninterventions. To augment such transfer oftechnology efforts, frequent assessment ofissues faced by horticulture farmers and theirpreferences etc., is essential.

National Farmers Meet 2015

With the above-mentioned background,Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR)in collaboration with Tamil Nadu AgriculturalUniversity (TNAU), Coimbatore, organized aNational Farmers Meet (NFM) at RegionalResearch Station (RRS), Paiyur, Tamil Naduon March 13, 2015. It was an uniqueprogramme and first of its kind because about1000 horticulture farmers from Karnataka,Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and Keralaparticipated in the programme. The immediatepurpose was to create awareness aboutimproved horticultural productiontechnologies among the horticulture farmersand to understand the issues faced by themin horticulture production.

The NFM employed different extensionmethods such as exhibition of improvedproduction technology of horticulture cropsexhibited by various institutes of ICAR andTNAU, who mandated to work on horticulturecrops; visits to demonstrations andexperimental plots; method demonstrationsof horticulture machinery and implementsand farmers-scientists interface meeting.During the interface meeting, solutions were

suggested by the scientists towards thequeries/ doubts raised by farmers. Thescientists too obtained first-hand feedbackabout the contemporary issues in horticultureprevailing in Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, AndhraPradesh and Kerala. In a nutshell, thisprogramme was a complete one that cateredto the information needs of farmers andscientists. This programme was also used asa platform to assess and prioritize the issuesand preferences of horticulture farmers asreported earlier (Narayaswamy et al., 2005) .This papers discusses the salient findings thatemanated from such assessment.

METHODOLOGY

It was proposed during the NFM to conducta survey in order to identify the major cropsgrown by horticulture farmers in Karnataka,Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh; to assessthe contemporary issues in horticulture facedby them; their information seeking behaviourand the their preferences towards extensioninterventions. The purpose was to utilize suchinformation for arriving at strategies towardspragmatic designing of extension programmes(Venkattakumar and Padmaiah, 2012).

To this effect, a structured interviewschedule was designed and employed to collectthe data from farmers, who participated inNFM. The interview schedule was distributedto the farmers, who visited the exhibition stallof ICAR-Indian Institute of HorticulturalResearch (IIHR), established at NFM site.Approximately 600 farmers (N-population)from Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and AndhraPradesh visited the exhibition stall of ICAR-

5501Issues and Preferences of Horticulture Farmers

IIHR. Out of the 600 farmers, 60 farmers(10%), filled-in the schedule and returnedback, thus constituted the sample (n) of thestudy. The collected data were tabulated andanalyzed.

The data pertaining to crops grown by thehorticulture farmers was analyzed throughpercentage analysis, whereas the datapertaining to issues in horticulture asperceived by the farmers, their informationseeking behaviour and their preferencestowards extension interventions were analyzedthrough Rank-Based Quotient (RBQ) analysis.

The RBQ vale was arrived through thefollowing formula (Shenoy et al., 2006):

factor; n= number of ranks; fi= number offarmers ranked a particular critical successfactor under ith rank.


Major horticulture crops

Mango is the major fruit crop grown bynearly two-third of the participants (61.66%)of NFM, followed by Banana, which is grownby more than two-fifth of the respondents(43.33%) (Table 1). The horticulture farmers,who participated in the NFM also grow fruitcrops such as Papaya and Guava. Among thevegetable crops, Tomato is the major onecultivated by three-fifth of the farmers(60.0%), followed by Hot Pepper, which iscultivated by nearly half of the farmers(48.33%). Egg-plant and Ladies Finger are the

RBQ= i1n “ fi (n+1-i) X 100

N X n

where, i= rank concerned; N= total numberof respondents responded for a critical success

Table 1.Major Horticulture Crops Grown by Farmers (n=60)

Sl.No. Crop percent (%)

1. Mango 61.66

2. Tomato 60.00

3. Chilli 48.33

4. Banana 43.33

5. Jasmine 35.00

6. Brinjal 26.66

7. Papaya 21.66

8. Rose 20.00

9. Chrysanthemum 15.00

10. Marigold 13.30

11. Guava 11.66

12. Okra 11.66


other major vegetable crops cultivated by therespondents.

Similarly, among the ornamental crops,Jasmine is the major crop cultivated by morethan one-third of the farmers (35%), whereasRose, Chrysanthemum and marigold are theother ornamental crops cultivated. Though,meaningful interpretations cannot be arrived-at about the crops cultivated by therespondents, the information given in Table1 gives the profile of horticulture crops interms of predominant crops grown and suchinformation provides implications towardsresearch and extension priority setting inKarnataka, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh.

Issues in horticulture

Non-availability of critical inputs such asfertilizers, seeds/ planting material (rank 1 &4) and lack of remunerative market price (rank3) are the major issues in contemporaryhorticulture, apart from unawareness towardsimproved horticulture production technologies(Table 2). Such information implies theineffectiveness of existing extensionmechanism of the state level developmentdepartments. Hence, there is a need forpromoting innovative extension models suchas Horticultural Producers’ Co-operativeMarketing and Processing Society Ltd.

(HOPCOMS), National Dairy DevelopmentBoard (NDDB) Safal, Farmers’ ProducerOrganizations (FPOs), Contract Farming, Agri-clinics and Agribusiness Centres (ACABC) etc.,

who can cater to the broad-based needs ofhorticulture farmers. Severe pest incidence,non-availability of timely market information,severe disease incidence, non-availability of

Sl.No. Problems RBQ Value Rank

1. Non-availability of fertilizers 70.7 1

2. Unawareness towards improved production technologies 65.7 2

3. Lack of remunerative market price 65.4 3

4. Non-availability of planting materials /seeds 62.6 4

5. Severe pest incidence 51.1 5

6. Non-availability of timely market information 48.5 6

7. Severe disease incidence 40.7 7

8. Non-availability of insecticides/chemicals 38.1 8

9. Lack of irrigation source/ facilities 30.0 9

Average 52.5

Table 2. Issues in Production of Horticulture Crops (n=60)


insecticides/chemicals and lack of irrigationsource/ facilities are the other issues ingrowing horticulture crops.

Information seeking behaviour ofhorticulture farmers

It is interesting to note that the horticulturefarmers seek information pertaining tohorticulture production technology primarily

from Department of Horticulture (Rank 1) andResearch Stations/ Institutes (Rank 3), apartfrom Television programmes (Rank 2)(Table 3). Radio (Rank 4) and newspapers(rank 5) are the other important mass mediasources from which the horticulture farmersseek information. This information impliesthat there is a need to effectively utilize themass media channels to disseminate improved

horticulture production technologies tofarmers. The development departments andresearch organizations need to formulatespecial strategies to utilize the mass mediachannels such as sponsoring radio serials,trying innovative television formats andwriting success stories in news papers.

Preferences of horticulture farmerstowards extension interventions

Field demonstrations and off-campustraining programmes are the two majorextension interventions preferred by thehorticulture farmers (Table 4). The

Table 3.Information Seeking Behaviour of Horticulture Farmers (n=60)

Sl.No. Information Source RBQ Value Rank

1. Department of Horticulture 70.7 1

2. Television 66.4 2

3. Research Stations/Institutes 48.3 3

4. Radio 45.2 4

5. Newspaper 43.7 5

6. Input dealers 38.1 6

7. KVKs 36.3 7

8. Progressive farmer / contact farmer 31.9 8

9. NGOs 31.5 9

Average 45.8


Table 4.Preferences of Horticulture Farmers Towards Extension Interventions (n=60)

Sl.No. Intervention RBQ Value Rank

1. Field demonstration 67.1 1

2. Off-campus training 50.2 2

3. Krishi mela 46.0 3

4. Exposure visits 45.0 4

5. Exhibition 45.0 4

6. Interaction meeting 42.9 6

7. On-campus training 38.1 7

Average 47.8

development departments/KVKs andextension wings of research institutes needto employ these interventions in order toeffectively disseminate the improvedhorticulture production technologies. Here,the important point to remember is that,wherever, the field demonstrations areorganized, corresponding field days are to beorganized at the peak period of the crop.

Krishi melas, exposure visits, exhibitions,interaction meetings and on-campus trainingprogrammes are the other extensioninterventions expressed by horticulturefarmers and their respective order ofpreference has been given in Table 4.

CONCLUSION

The NFM organized by ICAR and TNAU atRRS, Paiyur, Tamil Nadu was a completeplatform to analyse the issues and preferencesin contemporary horticulture production. The

analysis of the response of farmers fromKarnataka, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradeshimplied meaningful suggestions towardseffective extension strategies for disseminationof improved horticulture productiontechnologies as follows:

Non-availability of critical inputs is themajor issue in horticulture production;hence, there is a need for promotinginnovative extension models inhorticulture to cater to broad-basedneeds of horticulture farmers.

Mass media channels are the majorsources of information for horticulturefarmers in seeking informationpertaining to improved horticultureproduction technologies; hence, theextension personnel need to effectivelyemploy radio, television andnewspapers for disseminationhorticulture information.


Field demonstrations coupled with fielddays and off-campus trainingprogrammes are the preferred extensioninterventions by horticulture framers;hence extension personnel need toeffectively employ these methodseffectively.

REFERENCES

IIHR Annual Report 2013-14. Indian Institute ofHorticultural Research, Bengaluru, Karnataka.P 198.

Narayaswamy, B., Ramakrishna, Naika., Nataraju,M S. and Narayana, Gowda K. 2005. Opinion

of Farmers on Krishi Mela and TheirSuggestions. Journal of Extension Education.16 (1&2).

Shenoy, Sandhya N., Rama, Rao D., Rao, N H.,Reddy, M N. and Sontakki, B S. 2006. ICTsfor sharing agricultural information in ruralIndia, AP Cess Project Report, NationalAcademy of Agricultural ResearchManagement (NAARM), Hyderabad, P 1-20.

Venkattakumar, R. and Padmaiah, M. 2012. AStrategic Communication Technique forTransfer of Castor and Sunflower ProductionTechnologies. Journal of Oilseeds Research.29 (1): 77-83.


Knowledge of Precision Farming Beneficiaries

A.V. Greena1, S. Kalaivani2 and S. Palaniswamy3

ABSTRACTPrecision Farming is one of the many advanced farming practices that make production

more efficient by better resource management and reducing wastage. TN-IAMWARM is aworld bank funded project aims to improve the farm productivity and income throughbetter water management. The present study was carried out in Kambainallur sub basinof Dharmapuri district with 120 TN-IAMWARM beneficiaries as respondents. The resultindicated that more than three fourth (76.67 %) of the respondents had high level ofknowledge on precision farming technologies which was made possible by theimplementation of TN-IAMWARM project. The study further revealed that educational status,occupational status and exposure to agricultural messages had a positive and significantcontribution to the knowledge level of the respondents at 0.01 level of probability whereasexperience in precision farming and social participation had a positive and significantcontribution at 0.05 level of probability.

1-PG Scholar, Dept. of Agrl.Extension and Rural Sociology, TNAU, Coimbatore- 641 003, 2- Assistant Professor(Agrl.Extension), AC&RI, Eachangkottai, Thanjavur – 614 902 and 3-Professor & Head, Training Division, TNAU,Coimbatore – 641 003.

Indian Agriculture is characterized by smalland marginal operational holdings. Due tothe small size of holdings and heterogeneityof cropping systems application of crudetechnologies of Precision Farming is not easyin India (Shanwad et al., 2004). Tamil Naduis one of the water deficit States in India, withonly 925 millimeters of average rainfall in ayear. Agriculture is the largest consumer ofwater in the State, using 75 per cent of theState’s water. Considering the huge demandof water for irrigation purpose, a statesponsored project, Tamil Nadu PrecisionFarming Project (TNPFP) was implementedduring 2004-05 to 2006-07 in Dharmapuriand Krishnagiri districts, aiming atimprovement of agricultural sector witheffective use of limited resources includingwater (TNAU agritech portal).

Considering the huge impact of Tamil NaduPrecision Farming Project, Tamil NaduIrrigated Agriculture Modernization and WaterBodies Restoration and Management (TNIAMWARM), a World Bank funded project wasimplemented with the prime motive ofmaximizing the productivity of water leadingto improved farm incomes and products.Precision Farming is one of the importantcomponents of the project. Under this project,63 selected sub basins were covered from theyear 2007 to 2015 covering an ayacut area of6.17 lakh hectares with Water ResourcesOrganization as the nodal agency. InDharmapuri district this project wasimplemented in the year 2010 and the farmerswere taught about water saving and improvedproduction technologies of major crops.Therefore a study was undertaken with an

5507Knowledge of Precision Farming Beneficiaries

objective to assess the impact of recommendedPrecision Farming technologies on theknowledge of the TN-IAMWARM beneficiaries.

METHODOLOGY

Expost facto research design was adoptedwith the beneficiaries of Precision Farmingunder TN-IAMWARM project in Kambainallursub-basin of Dharmapuri district asrespondents of the study. From all the fiveblocks of the Kambainallur sub-basin wherethe project was implemented 120 respondentswere selected by employing proportionaterandom sampling method. The data werecollected with the use of a well structuredinterview schedule. The collected data were

analyzed using the statistical tools viz.,percentage analysis, mean and StandardDeviation and multiple regression analysis.


Over all knowledge level of precisionfarming beneficiaries

It could be inferred from Table 1 that morethan three fourth (76.67%) of the respondentshad high level of knowledge on PrecisionFarming technologies followed by 17.50 percent with medium level of knowledge leavingthe remaining 5.83 per cent at low level. Thismight be due to the frequent field visits madeby the scientists and field staff of TN-

Table 1.Distribution of Respondents According to Their Overall Knowledge level

(n = 120)

IAMWARM project and the trainings andexhibitions conducted under the project.Hence, the respondents got enoughopportunities to gather more informationabout the technologies they are adopting aswell to clarify their doubts regarding PrecisionFarming. The results are in line withSatiyachitradevi (2006).

Technology wise knowledge ofprecision farming beneficiaries

The knowledge of the respondents was

measured in terms of a number technologiesfollowed in precision farming. It could beobserved from Table 2 that all the respondentshad knowledge about the type of irrigationused in Precision Farming. About 95.83 percent and 88.33 per cent of the respondentshad knowledge about the portrays used forpreparing the nursery and the use of plasticmulching done in fields under PrecisionFarming. The water soluble fertilizers usedin Precision Farming was known to 78.33 percent of the respondents and 68.67 per cent

Sl. No. Category Number Per cent

1. Low 7 5.83

2. Medium 92 76.67

3. High 21 17.50

Total 120 100.00


Table 2.Distribution of Respondents According to Their Technology wise Level of Knowledge


Sl. No. Recommended technologies *Number Percent

1. Trichoderma viride is used for seed treatment 82 68.67

2. Plastic mulching is done in the field to conserve moisture

as well as to suppress weeds 106 88.33

3. Portrays are used for nursery preparation in Precision Farming 115 95.83

4. Six mulching rolls are required per acre 82 68.33

5. The type of irrigation used in Precision Farming is drip irrigation 120 100.00

6. Water soluble fertilizers are recommended under Precision Farming 94 78.33

7. Planofix is used in vegetables to control flower shedding 66 55.00

8. Acid used to clear clogging in drippers is hydrochloric acid 26 21.67

(n = 120)

each had knowledge on the use of Trichodermaviride which is used for seed treatment andnumber of mulching rolls required per acre.Planofix which is used to control flowershedding was known to about 55.00 per centof the respondents and only 21.67 per centwere knowledgeable about the name of theacid used to clear clogging in drippers.Majority of the basic technologies in PrecisionFarming were known to most of therespondents. Field visits by project staff,trainings, exhibitions, etc., might have helpedthem to gain more knowledge.

Contribution of the profilecharacteristics of respondents to theirlevel of knowledge

It could be seen from Table 3 that thevariables viz., educational status (X2),occupational status (X3) and exposure toagricultural messages (X9) had a positive and

significant contribution with the level ofknowledge of the respondents at 0.01 level ofprobability whereas experience in precisionfarming (X7) and social participation (X11) hadpositive and significant contribution at 0.05level of probability.

It could be interpreted from the results thatthe level of knowledge would increase withincrease in the educational status,occupational status, exposure to agriculturalmessage, experience in precision farming andsocial participation. Respondents withagriculture alone as their occupation wouldhave more time to involve in activities thatenhance their knowledge. Exposure toagricultural messages, social participation andexperience in precision farming wouldnaturally contribute to the level of knowledgeof the respondents as the respondents aregetting more opportunities to get exposed toinformation on precision farming. As

5509Knowledge of Precision Farming Beneficiaries

R2= 0.514; F=7.937 ** Significant at 0.01 level of probability * Significant at 0.05 level of probability NS = Non-Significant

Table 3.Multiple Regression Analysis of Profile Characteristics of Respondents

with Their Level of Knowledge

X1. Age 0.002 0.226 0.008NS

X2. Educational status 0.505 0.072 7.039**

X3. Occupational status 0.152 0.141 1.075**

X4. Annual income -0.034 0.000 -0.226NS

X5. Farm size -0.037 0.185 -0.202NS

X6. Farming experience 0.010 0.009 1.063NS

X7. Experience in Precision Farming 0.835 0.331 2.521*

X8. Shift in cropping pattern 0.170 0.141 1.209NS

X9. Exposure to agricultural messages 0.094 0.031 3.022**

X10. Contact with extension and other agencies 0.002 0.054 0.029NS

X11. Social participation 0.128 0.064 1.979*

X12. Attitude towards Precision Farming 0.006 0.065 0.090NS

X13. Scientific orientation -0.064 0.063 -1.014NS

X14. Economic motivation 0.029 0.047 0.631NS

‘t’value

VariableNo.

Variables Standarderror

Regressionco-efficient

precision farming is comparatively new, mostof the agricultural programmes in televisionand radio focus on this in order to createawareness as well as to spread precisionfarming technologies among the people.Various agricultural agencies such as TamilNadu Agricultural University (TNAU) and StateDepartment of Agriculture also take initiativesto enhance the knowledge of the farmers onPrecision Farming. Emanuele et al. (2013) alsoreported that the knowledge on PrecisionFarming mainly depended on previousexperience of the farmers in similar area.

CONCLUSION

The present study revealed that nearly twothird of the beneficiaries of TN-IAMWARMproject possessed high level of knowledge onprecision farming. The high level of knowledgecan be attributed to the frequent field visits,trainings exhibitions etc. which wereconducted under the project. Since precisionfarming was felt as more innovative way offarming which would give higher income,almost all the beneficiaries had interest to gainmore knowledge about precision farming


technologies. Majority of the respondents wereknowledgeable about the basic technologiesfollowed under precision farming such asmulching, drip irrigation etc. Since majorityof the respondents were old aged it wasdifficult for many of them to memorize someof the technical terms used in precisionfarming. The practical exposure which thebeneficiaries got from the TN-IAMWARMproject helped them to improve theirknowledge.

REFERENCES

Emanuele Pierpaoli., Giacomo Carli., Erika Pignattiand Maurizio Canavari. 2013. Drivers ofPrecision Agriculture Technologies Adoption:A Literature review. 6th InternationalConference on Information andCommunication Technologies in Agriculture,Food and Environment (HAICTA).

Sathiyachitradevi, M. 2006. Spread andAcceptance of Low Cost Technologies of MajorCrops by Resource Poor Farmers. Unpub.M.Sc. (Ag.) Thesis, TNAU, Coimbatore.

Shanwad, U.K., V.C. Patil and H. Honne Gowda.2004. Precision Farming: Dreams and Realitiesof Indian Agriculture, Map India.

TNAU agrietch portal (agritech.tnau.ac.in)


Perception of Under Graduate Students (B.Sc.Agriculture)on Instructional Methods

O.R. Sulaja*

ABSTRACTThe study was undertaken to identify the effectiveness of different instructional tools

as perceived by Under Graduate students of College of Horticulture, Vellanikkara. Fieldvisit/ study tour was rated as the most effective instructional tool by 68 per cent ofrespondents, followed by practical classes in the field. The frequency of use of differentinstructional methods during the current semester was found out. Practical classes in thelaboratory were the most frequently used aid followed by lecture using power point. Morefield visits should be included within the time limit together with field practicals and workexperiences to ensure maximum learning experience to students.

*Ph.D (Agrl. Extension), Farm Officer (Sr. Grade), AICRP on BCCP & W, College of Horticulture, Vellanikkara,Kerala.

In the new era of technology, every aspectof human life is changing from traditional toinnovative methods. This has been reflectedin the case of instructional technology also.Formal education has long been dominatedby the traditional lecture, where the learnedfew impart wisdom to the passive massesthrough well-conceived but oftentimes longand dry oratories (Davies et al., 2013). It wasnoted that faculty have tended to rely onlectures and readings from texts thatculminate with a final exam to measureachievement (Lowerison et al. (2006). As aresult, the student may essentially be apassive recipient of information, raisingconcerns that the focus is more on merelearning whereby students only memorizefacts in preparation for tests, not in actualfield situations. Many new tools and methodsare used now to increase the effectiveness ofteaching and to improve the comprehension

of students, in addition to the traditionallecture method.

This study examines the perceptions ofUnder Graduate students on differentinstructional tools in their learning andknowledge gain. Various tools are used to suitthe requirements of specific learning situationand the expertise expected out of it. Theconfidence level of teachers are improvedusing different instructional technologies asthey can explain difficult concepts andcomplex functions using effective instructionaltools. In this context, the present study wasformulated with the following objectives:

(1) To study the effectiveness of differentinstructional tools as perceived byUnder Graduate students, and

(2) To observe the frequency of use ofdifferent instructional methods inundergraduate teaching


METHODOLOGY

The study was taken up during the year2013-14. The students who were undergoingB.Sc.Agriculture course at College ofHorticulture, Vellanikkara under KeralaAgricultural University, formed the subjectsof the study.

Respondents were selected from among thelist of students in the first year and final yearB.Sc. Agriculture students. Thirty twostudents each were selected from these twobatches of under graduate students in College

of Horticulture. The data collected weretabulated and statistical tools like frequencyand percentage were used for logicalconclusion.


1. Gender

The profile of students revealed that about19 per cent of first year students taken forstudy were male and 81 per cent were female.Thirteen per cent of final year students

sampled in this study were male and 87 percent female. The combined sample consistsof 16 per cent male and 84 per cent femalestudents.

2. Marks secured

Marks secured by students during theirlast semester of study were documented.

About 44 per cent of the students securedmarks below 80 per cent, whereas 20 per centof them secured 81 to 85 per cent marks. Anequal percentage (20%) of them scored marksbetween 86 and 90 per cent. Sixteen per centof them scored marks above 91 per cent.

3. Opinion about effectiveness of eachinstructional method

Twenty one different instructional methodswere listed out and the perception of studentson the effectiveness of each item was sought.The students were requested to mark theirresponses on a five point continuum- leasteffective, less effective, neutral, effective andmost effective which were assigned scores of1,2,3,4 and 5 respectively.

A perusal of the table 3 showed that fieldvisit/ study tour was rated as the mosteffective instructional tool by the respondents(68 per cent). This was followed by practical

Table 1.Distribution of Students based on Gender

Items Male Percentage Female PercentageI year 6 19 26 81

IV year 4 13 28 87

Total 10 16 54 84

(n = 64)

5513Perception of Under Graduate Students (B.Sc.Agriculture)on Instructional Methods

classes in the field (61 per cent), workexperiences (54 per cent), demonstrations (51per cent), practical classes in the lab (31 per

cent), brainstorming (28 per cent) andworkshop (28 per cent). Question answersession was perceived as the most effective

Table 2.Distribution of Students based on Marks Secured (in percentage) (n = 64)

Items Below 80 81 to 85 86 to 90 91 and aboveI year 25 9 34 31

IV year 63 31 6 -

Total 44 20 20 16

1 Lecture without any aid 0 0 02 Lecture using chalk board and or white board 19 9 143 Lecture using power point 13 25 194 Lecture using OHPs 0 6 35 Question answer sessions 25 25 256 Presentation by students 3 16 107 Use of multimedia 3 25 148 Assignments 0 6 39 Seminars 0 6 510 Conferences 0 9 511 Team projects 16 19 1712 Demonstrations 44 59 5113 Brainstorming 28 28 2814 Using internet for literature search 16 25 2015 Practical classes in the lab 16 47 3116 Practical classes in the field 38 84 6117 Work experiences 44 66 5418 Field visit/ study tour 63 75 6819 Workshop 9 47 2820 Case study 22 28 2521 Role play 16 22 19

Table 3.Effectiveness of Different Instructional Methods (in percentage) (n = 64)

Sl.No. Instructional methods/ tools/ aids

Responses in the highlyeffective category

Total(%)

I year (%) IV year (%)


tool by 25 per cent, an equal per cent ofstudents preferred case study. This wasfollowed by using internet for literature search(20 per cent), role play (19 per cent), lectureusing power point (19 per cent) and teamprojects (17 per cent). None of the studentspreferred lecture without any aid.

A thorough look into the table reveals thatfirst year students and final year students varyin their perception on effectiveness of differentinstructional tools. About 63 per cent of thefirst year students perceived field visit/ studytour as the most effective instructional toolfollowed by demonstrations (44 per cent) andwork experiences (44 per cent). Practicalclasses in the field were preferred by 38 percent of first year students followed by brainstorming (28 per cent) and case study (22 percent).

About eighty four per cent of the final yearstudents perceived practical classes in thefield as the most effective instructional tool.Seventy five per cent of them preferred fieldvisit/ study tour as the most effectiveinstruction aid followed by work experiences(66 per cent), demonstrations (59 per cent),practical classes in the lab (47 per cent) andworkshop (47 per cent). None of thempreferred lecture without any aid.

4. Frequency of use of differentinstructional methods

The students were asked to indicate howfrequently per semester the technologies wereused to support teaching and learning duringcurrent semester.

Scale : Never used during semester

Seldom used (less than 10% of classsessions)

Occasionally used (less than 50% of classsessions)

Frequently used (more than 50% of classsessions)

Never, Seldom, Occasionally and frequentlywere given scores of 1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively.

The table 4 depicts the frequency withwhich students perceive the use of specifictechnology by their teachers. Concerning thelecture without any aid, 25 per cent of firstyear students perceive this technology is usedmore than 50 per cent of class sessions whilenone of the final years reported the same.Similarly, 44 per cent of first year studentsperceived lecture using chalk board/ blackboard is used more than 50 per cent of classsessions while final years perceived it to be28 per cent. In the case of lecture using powerpoint the figures were 38 per cent and 75 percent respectively. About 22 per cent of firstyear students and 34 per cent of final yearstudents perceived “Use of multimedia” asmore than 50 per cent of class sessions. Thepercentage of doing assignments was higherfor both groups: 50 per cent and 53 per centfor first year students and final year studentsrespectively. Sixteen per cent of first yearstudents perceived ‘Seminars’ to be used morethan 50 per cent in contrast to final yearstudents (22 per cent). There wascommendable difference in the perception ofteam projects by first year students (3 percent) and final year students (19 per cent).

5515Perception of Under Graduate Students (B.Sc.Agriculture)on Instructional Methods

1 Lecture without any aid 25 0 132 Lecture using chalk board and or white board 44 28 363 Lecture using power point 38 75 564 Lecture using OHPs 6 13 95 Question answer sessions 16 6 116 Presentation by students 9 50 307 Use of multimedia 22 34 288 Assignments 50 53 529 Seminars 16 22 1910 Conferences 3 6 511 Team projects 3 19 1112 Demonstrations 13 6 913 Brainstorming 9 9 914 Using internet for literature search 9 28 1915 Practical classes in the lab 81 75 7816 Practical classes in the field 53 47 5017 Work experiences 9 38 2318 Field visit/ study tour 13 38 2519 Workshop 6 3 520 Case study 3 0 2

21 Role play 3 6 5

Table 4.Frequency of Use of Instructional Methods (in percentage) (n = 64)

Sl.No.

Instructional methods/ tools/ aidsMore than 50 % of classsessions (in percentage)

Total(N =64)I year (n=32) IV year (n=32)

Similarly ‘Using internet for literature searchwas perceived differently by first year students(9 per cent) and final year students (28 percent). The highest percentage was observedin the case of practical classes in lab: 81 percent by first year and 75 per cent by final yearstudents. Fifty three per cent of first yearstudents perceived ‘practical classes in thefield’ in more than 50 per cent of class sessionswhile 47 per cent of final year students

perceived the same. There was differenceamong first year students (9 per cent) and finalyears (38 per cent) in the case of workexperiences also. Thirteen per cent of firstyears and 38 per cent of final years perceivedfield visits/ study tours in more than 50 percent of class sessions.

The combined percentage of first yearstudents and final year students (78 per cent)


indicated that practical classes in the lab wasperceived to be used more than 50 per cent ofclass sessions. It was followed by lecture usingpower point (56 per cent), assignments (52per cent), practical classes in the field (50 percent), lecture using chalk board/ white board(36 per cent), presentation by students (30per cent), use of multimedia (28 per cent), fieldvisit/ study tour (25 per cent), workexperiences (23 per cent), seminars (19 percent) and using internet for literature search(19 per cent).

CONCLUSION

The study attempted to list out all possibleinstructional methods/ tools which arepresently used in Under Graduate teachingat College of Horticulture, Vellanikkara.Students’ perception on effectiveness ofdifferent teaching aids was found out byranking different instructional aids. Fieldvisit/ study tour was rated as the mosteffective instructional tool as the students getfamiliarized with crops and cropping patternswhich they have not seen before. This was

followed by practical classes in the field andwork experiences where the students get firsthand experience of crops and problems inactual field. The frequency of use of differentinstructional aids was also found. Thestudents reported that practical classes in thelaboratory were most frequently used followedby lecture using power point and givingassignments. Teachers can remodulate theirteaching in a way that there is a perfectbalance between field visits, practical classesand class lectures so that the students getmaximum benefit out of their learningexperiences.

REFERENCES

Davies, T.L., Lavin, A.M. and Korte, L. 2009.Student Perceptions of How TechnologyImpacts the Quality of Instruction andLearning. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies.The University of South Dakota Beacom Schoolof Business (Sept 2009):2-16. Available:search. proquest.com/openview/ee 0340b98092133 e8edd3bd6caa2c60c.pdf

Lowerison, G., Sclater, J., Schmid, R. F., & Abrami,P. C. 2006. Student Perceived Effectiveness ofComputer Technology us in Post-secondaryClassrooms. Computer and Education, 47,465-489.


Socio-Economic Profiling of Tribal Dairy Farmers in NorthernHills Zone of Chhattisgarh

P. Mooventhan1, K.S. Kadian2, R. Senthilkumar3 and C. Karpagam4

ABSTRACT

Chhattisgarh is traditionally known as the Rice Bowl of Central India. Chhattisgarhstate has one of highest shares of Scheduled Tribe (ST) population within a state, accountingfor about 10 per cent of the STs in India. Scheduled Castes and STs together constitutemore than 50 per cent of the state’s population. Agriculture is counted as the chief economicoccupation of the state. About 80% of the population of the state is rural and the mainlivelihood of the villagers is agriculture and agriculture-based small industry. Thisexploratory study was conducted in the tribal populated districts of Chhattisgarh state. Inthis paper, socio-economic profile of tribal farmers are discussed in detail. About 65.33percent of the tribal farmers were between 36 and 50 years of age group, more than onefourth (34.67%) of the farmers were educated up to primary school level, less than half(39.00%) of the respondents had subsistence dairy farming + Minor forest products collection+ labour as their sole occupations, nearly half (43.67%) of the respondents were marginalfarmers, more than half (62.00 %) of the farmers were found with medium level of farmingexperience, about half (49.00 %) of the respondents were at the income range of Rs.25,001 to Rs. 75,000, about half (44.67 %) of the respondents falling under the categoryof medium herd size followed by 35.67 percent in small and 19.66 percent in large herdsize, more than half (56.33%) of the tribal dairy farmers falling under the category ofsubsistence level of dairy production system.

1- Scientist, ICAR - National Institute of Biotic Stress Management, Raipur, India, 2- PS, Scientist, Division of DairyExtension, National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, India and 3- Senior Scientist and 4 - Scientist, Central Instituteof Cotton Research, Regional Station, Coimbatore.

India is a vast and diverse country, whichis also a home for over one-fourth of world’sabsolute poor. Among the social groups inIndia, Scheduled Tribes (ST) have the highestproportion of the poor. While they account foronly 8 percent of the total population, theycomprise 40 percent of the displacedpopulation (CTDP, 2015). The population ofChhattisgarh is notable for the high proportionof Scheduled Tribes which constitute 31.8percent of the total state populace (CensusIndia, 2015). Indian dairy sector mainly

comprises of millions of small and marginalfarmers in dairying who own two to threeanimals and produce an average of 5 litersper day. Livestock development in general anddairy development activities in particular arekey components of pro-poor developmentstrategies because livestock distribution ismuch more equitable than land distribution.Thus, changes in the dairying environmenthave important implications for thesmallholder farmers and for poverty reduction(Meeta Punjabi, 2014). Chhattisgarh state is


playing an important role by generating self-employment through dairy in rural areaswhich in turn provides nutritious food to ruralfolks.

Dairy sector has generated an employmentpotential for most of the tribal communitybelongs to weaker section of the society(Senthil Kumar et al., 2012). Dairy farmingcould help to generate millions of livelihoodin the state on one hand and ensure thequality and balanced nutritious food to thepublic on another hand. Chhattisgarh stateis still in primitive stage in dairy farmingthough the state has good number of cattlepopulation compared to other leading milkproducing states. Smallholder milkproductivity is abysmally low and milk is notconsidered as major product. The cattlerearing system has been extensive grazing andlow input cost based. It is observed that therearing of livestock animals especially invillages has focus on draught power ratherthan milk (Sanjeev Kumar, et al., 2014 ).Earlier research findings indicates that, tribalfarmers possessed with low level of education(Srivastava, 1982), majority of the respondentshad agriculture as primary occupationfollowed by labour and dairying (Pandey, 1996)and farmers had an average of 3.25 milchanimals per household for their livelihood(Subramanian, 1992). Since, in-depth studyof profile characteristics of the tribal dairyfarmers gives a clear-cut picture about therespondents’ background, living condition,surroundings and belongings which in turnwill help to bring appropriate policyimplications based on derived conclusions.

The socio-economic profiling of the tribalfarmers was carried out to get a preciseunderstanding about the respondents towardsdairy farming and other allied activities. Inthe present exploratory study, twelveindependent and two dependent variableshave been taken into consideration. Therelevant information was collected and thefindings are presented as follows.

METHODOLOGY

The present study was conducted during2014-15 in the selected districts ofChhattisgarh. Out of 27 districts inChhattisgarh, three tribal populated districtsnamely Surajpur, Surguja and Balrampurwere selected for the study. From each district,four villages were selected and from eachvillage 25 dairy tribal respondents wereselected thus 300 respondents wereconstituted for the study. Stratified simplerandom sampling method was used to selectthe respondents. A comprehensive semi-structured interview schedule wasconstructed and the same was pre-tested with30 tribal farmers selected from non-samplingvillages. Modification was made in theschedule after pretesting as found necessaryand it was finalized before its finaladministration. Utmost care was taken toensure that the items were perceptible, to thepoint, complete, comprehensive, andunambiguous. Further, some of the importantproduction data were documented using aParticipatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) tools,participatory observation, indirectobservation, on-site documentation, key

5519Socio-Economic Profiling of Tribal Dairy Farmers in Northern Hills Zone of Chhattisgarh

informant survey and focused groupdiscussions.


Profile characteristics of the respondentsgives a clear-cut picture about therespondents’ background, living condition,surroundings and belongings which in turn

will help to bring appropriate policyimplications based on derived conclusions.The socio-economic profiling of the tribalfarmers was carried out to get a preciseunderstanding about the respondents towardsInteractive Educational Multimedia Modulelearning. In the present experimental study,twelve independent and two dependent

Sl.No. Category Frequency Percentage RankA. Age

1. Young (Upto 35 years) 47 15.67 III

2. Middle (36 - 50 years) 196 65.33 I

3. Old (Above 50 years) 57 19.00 II

B. Education1. Illiterate 83 27.66 II

2. Functionally literate 7 2.33 VI

3. Primary education 104 34.67 I

4. Middle education 69 23.00 III

5. Secondary education 23 7.67 IV

6. Higher secondary education 9 3.00 V

7. Collegiate and above 5 1.67 VII

C. Occupational status1. Subsistence dairy farming + Minor forest products

collection + labour 117 39.00 I

2. Primary crop farming + Subsidiary dairy farming 93 31.00 II

3. Primary dairy farming + Subsidiary crop farming 63 21.00 III

4. Subsidiary dairy farming + other services 27 9.00 IV

Table 1.Distribution of Respondents According to their Age, Education and Occupational Status

(n = 300)

variables have been taken into consideration.The relevant information was collected andthe findings are presented as follows.

It could be observed from Table 1 that65.33 percent of the tribal farmers werebetween 36 and 50 years of age, followed by


19.00 percent with the class intervals of > 50years. Very meager percent (15.67 %) of thefarmers were of the age upto 35 years of age.This leads us to understand that majority ofthe respondents (65.33 %) selected for thisstudy belonged to the middle-aged category.More than one fourth (34.67%) of the farmerswere educated up to primary school level andless than one fourth (27.66 %) of therespondents were illiterate. About 23.00percent of respondents possessed middle levelof education. The high level of education,namely collegiate education was found among1.67 percent of the respondents. About 7.67percent of farmers possessed secondary levelof education and 2.33 percentages of thefarmers were functionally literate. About 3.00percent of farmers possessed higher secondaryeducation.

It is observed from table 1 that less thanhalf (39.00%) of the respondents hadsubsistence dairy farming + Minor forestproducts collection + labour as their soleoccupations, followed by 31.00 percent withprimary agriculture and subsidiary dairyfarming, about 21.00 percent with primarydairy farming and subsidiary agriculture andthe rest 9.00 percent with subsidiary dairyfarming and other services. Here, nearly half(48.67 %) of the respondents fall under nonprimary dairy farming because the tribalworkers are engaged in the primary sector ofeconomy related to exploitation of naturalresources. Agriculture is counted as the chiefeconomic occupation of the state, horticultureand animal husbandry also engage a majorshare of the total population of the state.

About 80 percent of the population of the stateis rural and their main livelihood is solelydepending on agriculture and agriculture-based sub sectors.

Table 2 clearly indicates that nearly half(43.67%) of the respondents were marginalfarmers, followed by 37.33 percent were smallfarmers, about 10.33 percent were mediumfarmers and 8.67 percent were big farmers.From the results it could be concluded thatmajority (81.00%) of the respondents wereunder the category of marginal and smallfarmers. Further, it could be very interestingto note that cent percent of the respondentsat least hold their small piece of land as theirown. This might be due to the fact that thestate government is allocating forest lands/other natural resources to tribal communitiesfor their livelihood, overall development andfor holistic welfare.

It could be seen from Table 2 that morethan half (62.00 %) of the farmers were foundwith medium level of farming experiencefollowed by 27.33 percent with high level offarming experience and 10.67 percent offarmers possessed low level of experience infarming. Here, majority (62.00%+27.33%) ofthe farmers were found with medium and highlevel of farming experience due to the fact thattribal community is the integral part of thenatural system and they start their lifethrough utilising natural resources forfarming activities. Farming is their basiclivelihood activity by generation by generation.With respect to farming exposure, about 92.33percent of the farmers were hereditarywhereas about 7.67 percent of the farmers


Sl.No. Category Frequency Percentage RankA. Farm size

1. Marginal farmers (up to 2.5 acres) 131 43.67 I

2. Small farmers (2.51 - 5.00 acres) 112 37.33 II

3. Medium farmers (5.01 - 10.00 acres) 31 10.33 III

4. Big farmers (above 10.00 acres) 26 8.67 IV

B. Farming experience1. Low (Upto 10 years) 32 10.67 III

2. Medium (11 to 20 years) 186 62.00 I

3. High (Above 20 years) 82 27.33 II

C. Annual income1. Upto Rs. 25,000 57 19.00 II

2. Rs. 25,001 to 75,000 147 49.00 I

3. Rs. 75,001 to 1,25,000 54 18.00 III

4. Above Rs. 1,25,000 42 14.00 IV

D. Innovativeness1. As soon as it is brought to my knowledge 34 11.33 III

2. After I have seen it, being adopted by other

members successfully 217 72.34 I

3. I prefer to wait and take my own time 49 16.33 II

Table 2.Distribution of Respondents According to their Farm Size, Farming Experience,

Annual Income and Innovativeness (n = 300)

were from first generation. The results inTable 2 indicates that about half (49.00 %) ofthe respondents were at the income range ofRs. 25,001 to Rs. 75,000/- followed by 19.00percent of farmers earning upto Rs. 25,000.Further, it could be observed from the sametable that 18.00 percent of farmers were underthe income range between Rs. 75,001 toRs. 1,25,000 and least percentage (14.00%)of the respondents had obtained above Rs.1.25 lakhs as an annual income from farmingand allied activities. It is inferred from theresults that majority (77.77 %) of the farmershad their earning upto Rs. 75,000 per year.

This might be the reason that, most of farmersare depending on agriculture + dairy farming+ Minor forest products collection + laboureras a major source of income for theirlivelihood. The incidence of poverty inChhattisgarh is very high. The prevalence ofpoverty in the rural and urban areas is almostthe same. More than half of the rural STs andurban SCs are poor. In general, the proportionof poor SC and ST households in the state ishigher than the state average and theircommunity’s respective national averages(except for rural SC households). Given thatmore than 50 percent of the state’s population


comprises STs and SCs and high incidence ofincome poverty among them is a matter ofserious concern in the state. From Table 2clearly indicates that majority (72.34%) of thetribal farmers would like to adopt theinnovation “After I have seen it, being adoptedby other members successfully” followed by16.33 percent of the farmer responded that “Iprefer to wait and take my own time” and leastnumber of farmers (11.33%) like to adopt theinnovation “ As soon as it is brought to theirknowledge”. So, the majority of the tribalfarmers adopt an innovation after the averageparticipant from their community. Theseindividuals approach an innovation with ahigh degree of skepticism and after the

majority of society has adopted the innovation.It is a fact that tribal farmers are skepticalabout any innovations and they believe theinnovations after they had received theimportance of the innovation from others.Hence, the results obtained.

Table 3 shows that more than half (56.33%)of the tribal dairy farmers falling under thecategory of subsistence level of dairyproduction system, followed by 27.67 percentof the farmers following semi-extensive andleast percentage (16.00%) of respondentsdoing dairy farming in a intensive way.Extensive dairy farming can becharacteristically described as a minimal use

Table 3.Herd Size and Dairy Production System in the Study Area (n = 300)

Sl.No. Category Frequency Percentage Rank1. Small (< 3 animals) 107 35.67 III2. Medium (3 - 7 animals) 134 44.67 II3. Large (> 7 animals) 59 19.66 V4 Extensive (Subsistence) 169 56.33 I5 Semi-extensive 83 27.67 IV6 Intensive 48 16.00 VI

of farm inputs such as feed and fodder, labor,infrastructure like cattle shed, and capitalsuch as veterinary services. In the semi-extensive system the main participants aresmall scale producers with small herd size.This system is low in cost with the purpose toutlise locally available resources effectively.Supplementation of additional feed andfodder, providing proper housing andveterinary care is the main features of thissystem of production. In intensive dairy

farming, cows are kept in “zero-grazing”systems which means they are kept indoorswhere the feed and fodder is brought to theanimal and they are given with high-proteindiet to increase their milk yield. It could beobserved from the Table 3 about half (44.67%) of the respondents falling under thecategory of medium herd size followed by35.67 percent in small and 19.66 percent inlarge herd size. Since the tribal farmers areeconomically backward they are unable to


maintain their herd in large size. It is alsodue to that the respondents are not onlydepend on dairy alone for their livelihood andthey engaged themselves in differententerprise viz., minor forest producecollection, agriculture, wage labour and inlandfishing.

CONCLUSION

This study concluded that majority of therespondents were falling under the categoryof low to medium level socio-economicstandards, so appropriate policy implicationshas to be developed to enhance their standardof living and livelihood status. Large scaleawareness campaigns and mass media shouldbe utilized in a big way to promote theprofitable farming enterprise. This resultsimplied that Model Dairy Villages (MDVs) maydeveloped at gross-root level to createawareness about Good Dairy FarmingPractices (GDFPs) among tribal farmers inturn to accelerate the adoption level forGDFPs. The variables such as age, educationalstatus, occupational status, mass mediaexposure, social participation, farm size andmilk production were found to act as a criticalvariables. So, while preparing developmentalprogrammes in future, one should take careof above variables.

REFERENCES

Census India, 2015. Data Highlights : TheScheduled Tribes, Chhattisgarh state, Census

of India 2001, http://censusindia.gov.in/Tablespublished/SCST/dhstchhattisgarh.pdf.Accessed 12 June (2015)

CTDP, 2015. Chhattisgarh Tribal DevelopmentProgramme. Tribal Development Society,Reaching the Poorest of the Poor. http://cjtdp.cg.gov.in/Projsummarye.htm. Accessed20 May (2015)

Meeta Punjabi, 2014. India: Increasing DemandChallenges the Dairy Sector. FAO. http://w w w . f a o . o r g / d o c r e p / 0 1 1 / i 0 5 8 8 e /I0588E05.htm. Accessed 20 June (2014)

Pandey, A.K. 1996. A Comparative Study ofLivestock Rearing System among Tribal andNon-Tribal in Chotanagpur Region of Bihar.Ph.D. Thesis, National Dairy Research Institute(Deemed University), Karnal, Haryana.

Sanjeev Kumar, Dhananjaya, B.N., and Singh AP.2014. The Livelihood School, Milking thepotentials: Study Report on Dairy Sub Sectorin Chhattisgarh. http://www.cgsird.gov.in/dairysubsectorreportfinasubmission.pdf.Accessed 10 May (2014)

Senthil Kumar, R., Ramkumar, Meena, B.S.,Subash, S. and Asif Mohammad. 2012.Entrepreneurial Behavior of Dairy Farmers,Indian Journal of Dairy Science, 65 (1) 174-177.

Srivastava, R.M. 1982. Cattle in Culture andEconomy of Tribal Mundas of Bihar. Unpub.Ph.D. Thesis, Kurukshetra University,Kurukshetra, Haryana.

Subramanian, V. 1992. A Study on the Impact ofMilk Producer’s Cooperative Societies inThanjavur District, Unpub. M. V. Sc. Thesis,Tamil Nadu University of Veterinary andAnimal Sciences, Chennai, Tamilnadu.


Women Journalists Working Conditions andTheir Suitability in the Media

R. Sasikala*

ABSTRACTGoing through the historical accounts of the press in India, though the women entered

the journalistic profession in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, they did notplayed an important role in designing and reshaping it. Today there are several womeneditors, columnists and television anchors. In the last decade, more women have enteredthe profession, and many have equal access to all beats, blurring the ‘traditional malearea’ line considerably. In this context, a study was conducted to know the workingconditions and their suitability in the media. The study was conducted in Chennai. ASample of 60 respondents was selected randomly by using purposive random samplingtechnique. The sample frame for the study includes both male and female journalists ofprint and electronic media. The respondents comprised of editors, sub- editors, reporters,programme executives and free lancers in both print and electronic media. The data wasobtained using the questionnaire and it was analyzed using percentage analysis method.The findings reveals that women journalists are encouraged and given freedom to organizetheir work and do not face major discrimination in their working spot on the basis ofgender and they are also given decision – making position in the media and their positionsin the media is satisfactory. Regarding, importance given for women issues in the media,both men and women journalist consider women issues as one of the important issue andwomen issues are portrayed adequately in the media.

*Assistant Professor (Journalism), Directorate of Extension Education, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore-641 003.

During the years since World War II, thepercentage of women in the work force hasincreased steadily. By 2000, the InternationalLabour Organization (ILO) estimated that halfof global workers would consist of women. Asof 2008, the percentage of women in theworkforce was 40.5 percent.(www.lycos.com.)

Going through the historical accounts ofthe press in India, though the women enteredthe journalistic profession in the late

nineteenth and early twentieth century, theydid not played an important role in designingand reshaping it. Today there are severalwomen editors, columnists and televisionanchors. In the last decade, more women haveentered the profession, and many have equalaccess to all beats, blurring the ‘traditionalmale area’ line considerably.

The number of women in the electronicmedia is dramatically higher than in the print

5525Women Journalists Working Conditions andTheir Suitability in the Media

media, averaging 30-40 per cent- a figure thatno editorial room of a newspaper can boast of(Akhileshwari,1990).

Journalism is no longer an alien field forwomen. Like all other professions, womenhave also gained a foothold in the art ofcommunication through writing. Still they arediscriminated in terms of their representationin creative and decision making position.Women are not given duty after 7 PM, as aresult of which even experienced journalistsare denied responsible decision-makingpositions and challenging assignments, andalso forced to forego promotions (RajashriDasgupta)

There are number of constraints on them.It is due to the male domination in theorganization. In order to encourage morewomen to join the profession, it is necessaryto undertake a study on the workingconditions and position of women journalistsin the media.

METHODOLOGY

The study was conducted in Chennai. ASample of 60 respondents was selectedrandomly by using purposive randomsampling technique. The sample frame forthe study includes both male and femalejournalists of print and electronic media. Therespondents comprised of editors, sub-editors, reporters, programme executives andfree lancers in both print and electronic media.The data was obtained using the questionnaireand it was analyzed using percentage analysismethod.


From Table 1 it was inferred that majorityof the respondents i.e 80 per cent of the maleand 73.3 per cent of the female agree thatwomen journalists are encouraged as muchas their male colleagues. Twenty per cent ofthe male and 26.6 per cent of the femalerespondent reported that the womenjournalists are not encouraged as much astheir male colleagues.

Ninety per cent of the male respondentsand 83.3 per cent of the female respondentsfelt that women journalists have freedom toorganize their work assigned as they thinkwhereas 10 per cent of the male respondentsand 16.6 per cent female respondent reportedthat the women journalists does not havefreedom to organize their work assigned asthey think.

Seventy per cent of the male respondentsand 56.6 per cent of the female respondentsreported that the women journalists do notencounter any interference from malecolleague whereas 30 per cent malerespondents and 43.3 per cent femalerespondents reported that women journalistsoften encounter interference from malecolleague while they work.

Seventy per cent of male respondents and83.3 per cent of the female respondentsreported that, in order to survive, womenjournalists are forced to develop good rapportwith their male colleagues whereas 30 per centof the male respondents and 16.6 per cent ofthe female respondents said that women


journalists are not forced to develop goodrapport with their male colleagues.

Seventy per cent of the male respondentsand 63.3 per cent of the female respondents’disagreed with the fact that, womenjournalists have to achieve more to get on par

with men whereas (30%) male respondentsand 36.6 per cent of the female respondentsagreed that women journalists have to achievemore in order to get on par with men.

It was observed from the findings thatwomen journalists are encouraged both in the

print and electronic media to show their skilland they are given freedom to organize theirwork without much interference from the malecolleagues. Majority of both the male andfemale respondents reported that womenjournalists are forced to develop good rapportwith their male colleagues in order to survivein the media.

From Table 2 it was inferred that 80 percent of the male respondents and 66.6 percent of the female respondents reported thatwomen journalists are given decision makingpositions whereas only 20 per cent of the malerespondents and 33.3 per cent of the femalerespondents reported that still women

Table 1.Working Conditions of Women Journalists

Sl.No. Items Male Female Agree Disagree Agree DisagreeNo. % No. % No. % No. %

1. Women journalists are encouraged asmuch as their colleagues 24 80 6 20 22 73.3 8 26.6

2. Women journalists have freedom toorganize the work assigned 27 90 3 10 25 83.3 5 16.6

3. Women journalists often encounter interference from male colleagues 9 30 21 70 13 43.3 17 56.6

4. Women journalists in order to surviveare forced to develop good rapport withtheir male colleagues 21 70 9 30 25 83.3 5 16.6

5. Women have to achieve more to geton par with men 9 30 21 70 11 36.6 19 63.3

journalists are not given decision makingpositions in their working spot. This showsthat women journalists’ decision makingpower is recognized.

Majority of the respondents 73.3 per centof male journalists and 80 per cent of femalejournalists do not agree that organizationalpolicy disregards women employees whereas26.6 per cent of the male journalists and 20per cent of the female journalists agreed thatorganizational policy disregards womenemployees.

Sixty per cent of female respondents and40 per cent of the male journalists agreed that

(n=60)


Table 2.Position of Women Journalists and Their Suitability in the Media

Sl.No. Items Male Female Agree Disagree Agree DisagreeNo. % No. % No. % No. %

1. Women are given decision makingpositions in media. 24 80 6 20 20 66.6 10 33.3

2. Organizational policy always disregardswomen employees. 8 26.6 22 73.3 6 20 24 80

3. Management feel men are better suitedfor the top job than women. 12 40 18 60 18 60 12 40

4. Women journalists are consulted in thedecision – making process 24 80 6 20 16 53.3 14 46.6

5. Women journalist’s suggestions areaccepted in the organizations matter. 22 73.3 8 26.6 21 70 9 30

6. Women journalists are not informative as men. 4 13.3 26 86.6 3 10 27 907. Being straight forward, women ill-

matched the organizations needs. 15 50 15 50 13 43.3 17 56.68. Women journalists are discriminated in

promotions and incentives. 5 16.6 25 83.3 11 36.6 19 63.3

management feels that men are better suitedfor the top positions than women whereas 60per cent of male respondents and 40 per centof the female respondents do not agree withthis statement. This shows that womenjournalists’ talents and capability in caringout the work is respected by the management.

Eighty per cent of the male respondentsand 53.3 per cent of the female respondentsreported that women journalists are consultedin the decision making process in theorganization. 20 per cent of the malerespondents and nearly half of the womenjournalists (46.6%) reported that women arenot involved in the decision making processin the organization. It indicates that thoughnow a days, women journalist are givendecision making powers, still there is

discrimination in involving women journalistsin decision making process.

Seventy three per cent of male respondentsand 70 per cent of female respondents agreethat women journalist’s suggestions areaccepted in the organizational matter. Itreveals that the women journalists’suggestions towards organizational matter areaccepted as that of men. Thirty per cent ofthe female respondents and 27 per cent of themale respondents reported that women’ssuggestions are not always accepted in theorganizational matter.

Eighty seven per cent male and 90 per centof the female respondents do not agree withthe statement that women journalists are notinformative as men. Only 13.3 per cent male

(n=60)


respondents and 10 per cent of the femalerespondents reported that women journalistsare not informative as men.

Fifty per cent of male respondents and 43.3per cent of the female respondents agreed thatbeing straight forward, women ill – match theorganizations needs whereas 50 per cent ofmale and 56.6 per cent of the femalerespondents disagree with the statement. Thatis being a journalist; straight forwardness isan essential quality which a journalist shouldpossess.

Majority of the respondents’ i.e 83.3 percent of male respondents and 63.3 per centof female respondents disagree with the

statement that woman journalists arediscriminated in promotions and incentiveswhereas 16.6 per cent of the men and 36.6per cent of women journalists agree thatwomen journalists are discriminated inpromotions and incentives. This statement isin line with a microscopic segment feels thatthey lack promotions and incentives. Risingup the ladder has been rather slow for womenjournalists. Promotions have not been asfrequent as for male journalists (SurekhaSule).

It is inferred from Table 3 that 36 percentof male respondents and 50 percent of femalerespondents agree that there is an inadequate

portrayal of women in the media due to maledomination whereas 63.3 percent male and50 percent female respondents feel that thesituation has partly changed. Now the womenissues are portrayed adequately in the media.

Majority of the respondents’ i.e 63.3percent of male and 60 per cent of femaledisagrees with the statement and reportedthat women issues are not considered trivial

by men and women issues are assignedequally for both men and women journalistswhereas 36.6 per cent and 43.3 per cent ofmale and female journalists respectivelyreported by that considering women issuestrivial and it is often assigned to women forcoverage. Quite a few women believe there areno discrimination and no glass ceiling in majorEnglish language papers. However, there is atendency to push women into feature writing

Table 3.Importance given to Women issues in the Media

Sl.No Items Male Female Agree Disagree Agree DisagreeNo. % No. % No. % No. %

1. Prevailing male domination resultsinadequate portrayal of women in the media 11 36.6 19 63.3 15 50 15 50

2. Writing on women issues in consideredtrivial for men and hence women areassigned the same always 11 36.6 19 63.3 13 43.3 18 60

3. Women alone can understand better andwrite about problems of women 15 50 15 50 19 63.3 11 36.6

(n=60)


and even non – serious writing such asreporting parties and social events(Akhileshwari).

Fifty percent of the male and 63.3 percentof the female respondents reported that,women can understand better about theproblems of women and give exclusivecoverage than men. But 50 per cent of maleand 36.6 per cent of the women journalistsreported that even men can write better aboutwomen problem.

The above result reveals that both men andwomen consider women issues as one of theimportant issue and women issues areportrayed adequately in the media.

CONCLUSION

The findings reveals that women journalistsare encouraged and given freedom to organizetheir work and do not face majordiscrimination in their working spot on thebasis of gender. It is also found that male

colleagues are friendly and co-operativetowards women in the organization.

It is also observed that women journalistsare given decision – making position in themedia and their positions in the media aresatisfactory.

Regarding, importance given for womenissues in the media, both men and womenconsider women issues as one of the importantissue and women issues are portrayedadequately in the media.

REFERENCES

Akhileshwari.1990. Should Women Opt forJournalism? :Vidura, Press Institute of India.

Akhileshwari. Press in the South : Status of WomenJournalists in India, Press Institute of India:24

Rajashri Dasgupta. Butterflies No More: Status ofWomen Journalists in India- Press Instituteof India:29

Surekha Sule. Work Conditions - As Bad As ForMen: Status of Women Journalists in India,Press Institute of India:98

https://www.lycos.com

CHIEF EDITOR

Dr. H. PHILIPDirector of Extension Education

Directorate of Extension EducationTamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore - 641 003

ASSOCIATE EDITORS

Dr. N. Kishore KumarProfessor

Dr. S. Usha RaniSenior Scientist

Dr. D. Puthira PrathapPrinicipal Scientist

Dr. A. Janaki RaniAssistant Professor

Extension Education Society is established to promote the cause of ExtensionScientists in India by (i) Providing a forum for Extension Scientists to meet periodicallyfor discussion, exchange of information, findings and experiences on different aspectson agricultural extension education, (ii) Publishing a quarterly journal called “Journalof Extension Education” and (iii) such other means consistent with the aims of thesociety as the Executive Committee decides.

Membership is open to persons with specialisation in Extension Education and whoare professing the discipline, subject to approval of the Executive Council.

Copies of the journal are supplied free to all members of the society. The rate ofsubscription is as follows:

Life Member (7 Years) - Individual : Rs. 4000.00 160$

Annual Member - Individual : Rs. 750.00 50$

- Single copy : Rs. 150.00 20$

Annual Subscription - Other facultymembers : Rs. 750.00 50$

Institution : Rs. 5000.00 200$Jan - Dec

Dr. N. AnandarajaAssistant Professor

EDITORIAL BOARD

EXTENSION EDUCATION SOCIETY

Founder President : Dr. G. PerumalPresident : Dr. J. VasanthakumarVice - President : Dr. V. RavichandranSecretary : Dr. T. RathakrishnanTreasurer : Dr. Ravikumar TheodoreChief Editor : Dr. H. PhilipAssociate Editors : Dr. N. Kishore Kumar

Dr. D. Puthira PrathapDr. S. Usha RaniDr. N. AnandarajaDr. A. Janaki Rani

Dr. B.S. Hansra : Principal, School of Agriculture, IGNOU, New Delhi.

Dr. A.K. Singh : Deputy Director General (Agricultural Extension)Indian Council of Agricultural Research,Krishi Anusandhan Bhavan, PUSA, New Delhi.

Dr. J. Oliver : Former Director of Extension Education, TNAU, Coimbatore.

Dr. Sreenath Dixit : Director, ICAR- Agricultural Technology Application ResearchInstitute, MRS, H.A. Farm Post, Hebbal, Bangaluru.

Dr. K. Thangamani : Former Dean, Home Science,Sri Avinashilingam Institute for Higher Education,Coimbatore.

Dr. Pochiah Maraty : Dean, PG Studies, ANGRAU, Hyderabad.

Dr. M. Nagoor Meeran : Director of Extension Education i/c,Tamil Nadu Fisheries University, First Line Beach Road,Nagapattinam.

Dr. S.Prabhukumar : Former Zonal Project DriectorICAR -Zone VIII, MRS, Hebbal, H.A. Farm Post, Bangaluru.

Dr. P.P. Murugan : Professor & Head, Dept. of AE & RS, AC & RI, Madurai.

Dr. G. Ranganathan : Professor and Head (Retd.),Dept. of Agrl. Extn., ADAC & RI, Trichy.

Dr.R.K.Talukdar : Professor & Head, Dept. of Extension Education,Assam Agricultural University, Jorhat.

Dr. L. Manjunath : Professor of Agrl. Extn., UAS, Dharwad.

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL MEMBERS

COUNCILLORS

from the editor’s desk - connecting repositories · evaluated from which the advantages and...

Documents