Agriculture Update

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Socio-Economic Conditions of the Farmers


Affiliations
1 Extension Division, Forest Research Institute, Dehradun (Uttarakhand), India
2 Forest Extension Division, Forest Research Institute, Dehradun (Uttarakhand), India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


Agroforestry empowers farmers to take risk in long term investments like growing tree species and/ or rearing livestock, fluctuation in price and increase or decrease in demand and supply of agri produces. To access socio-economic conditions of both agroforestry and non agroforestry farmers, a survey was conducted in Haridwar, India. To analyze it, data pertaining to socio-economic indicators such as income level and employment, family size and community structure like land holding value, land distribution and ownership type, housing characteristics and labour resources were collected and then compared. To elaborate this comparison more, some other factors like farming and agroforestry experience, decision making, knowledge, awareness and favor to agroforestry etc. were also studied. Results revealed that approximately 97.8 per cent of sampled households were male headed. Approximately 18.90 per cent agroforestry and 34.43 per cent non-agroforestry respondents were having less than 1 ha of land. About 75.62 per cent agroforestry farmers and 67.21 per cent non agroforestry farmers considered farming as main occupation. The higher income status in categories was found more (12.60% and 27.40%) in agroforestry respondents than (6.56% and 14.75%) in non agroforestry respondents. It was concluded that higher income status enables agroforestry farmers to live their live style according to their own choice, hence, encouraging them to adopt, continue or promote agroforestry in their field.

Keywords

Adoption, Adopters, Agroforestry, Farmers, Practice, Socio-Economic.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Abadi Ghadim, A.K. and Pannell, D.J. (1999). A conceptual framework of adoption of an agricultural innovation. Agric. & Res. Econ., 21 (2) : 145-154.

  • Abdrabo, M.A. and Hassaan, M.A. (2003). From river catchment to the sea: comparative and integrated approach to the ecology of Mediterranean coastal zones for sustainable management (MEDCORE). A manual for socio-economic study. Centre for environment and development for the Arab region and Europe, EC (Cadare). 1-76.

  • Ajayi, O.C., Franzel, S., Kuntashula, E. and Kwesiga, F. (2003). Adoption of improved fallow technology for soil fertility management in Zambia: Empirical studies and emerging issues. Agrofore. Syst., 59(3): 317-326.

  • Basamba, T.A., Mayanja C., Kiija, B., Nakileza, B., Matsiko, F., Nyende, P., Kukunda, E.B., Tumushabe, A. and Ssekabira, K. (2016). Enhancing adoption of agroforestry in the Eastern agro-ecological zone of Uganda. Internat. J. Ecolog. Sci. & Environ. Engg., 3 (1): 20-31.

  • Bhanotra, A., Gupta, J. and Singh, M. (2016). Socio-economic status and communication behaviour pattern of the dairy farmers in Kathua district of Jammu and Kashmir. Internat. J. Farm Sci., 6 (1): 37-42.

  • Chup, C.D. (2004). Analysis of agroforestry practices in Guinea Savannah ecological zone: A case study of federal territory of Nigeria (Ph.D. Thesis) University of Joes.

  • Glover, E.K., Hassan, B.A. and Glover, M.K. (2013). Analysis of socio-economic conditions influencing adoption of agroforestry practices. Internat. J. Agric. & Agroforestry, 3 (4): 178-184.

  • Irshad, M., Ashraf, M. and Sher, H. (2011). Identifying factors affecting agroforestry systems in Swat, Pakistan. Affrican J. Agric. Res., 6 (11) : 2586-2593.

  • Islam, M.W., Islam, M.M. and Sadath, M.N. (2012). Contribution of agroforestry practice towards reducing poverty at Kashabpur Upazila of Jessore District- A case study. J. Environ. Sci. & Nat. Res., 5 (2): 267-274.

  • Kabwe, G. (2010). Uptake of agroforestry technologies among smallholder farmers in Zambia. Ph.D. Thesis, Lincoln University, Christchurch, New Zealand.

  • Keil, A., Zeller, M. and Franzel, S. (2005). Improved tree fallows in smallholder maize production in Zambia: do initial testers adopt the technology? Agrofore. Systems, 64 (3) : 225-236.

  • Kiptot, E. and Franzel, S. (2011). Gender and agroforestry in Africa: are women participating? ICRAF Occasional Paper No. 13. Nairobi: World Agroforestry Centre.

  • Kumar, B.M. (2006). Agroforestry: the new old paradigm for Asian food security. J. Trop. Agric., 44 (1-2): 1-14.

  • Minz, A.V. and Quli, S.M.S. (2000). Impact of agroforestry on socio-economic status of farmers. Indian Forester, 124(6): 788-791.

  • Mombo, L.F., Senkondo, M., and Makonda, F. (2016). Attitude, adoption and economic potential of agroforestry in Kilosa district, Tnzania. Internat. J. Agric. Innovat. & Res., 4 (5): 883-893.

  • Nair, P.K.R. (1993). An introduction to agroforestry. Kluwer Acadmic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands. pp. 1-489.

  • Parihaar, R.S., Bargali, K. and Bargali, S.S. (2015). Status of an indigenous agroforestry system: A case study in Kumaun Himalaya, India. Indian J. Agric. Sci., 85 (3):442-447.

  • Parwada, C.,Gadzirayi, C.T., Karavina, C. and Munyati, V. (2012). A review of agroforestry technologies adoption among smallholder farms in Zimbabwe. J. Sustain. Develop. Stud., 1 (1): 68-92.

  • Rasul, G. and Thapa, G.B. (2006). Financial and economic suitability of agroforestry as an alternative to shifting cultivation: The case of the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh, Agric. Syst., 91 (1-2) : 29–50.

  • Safa, M.S. (2005). Socio-economic factors affecting the income of small scale agroforestry farms in Hill Country areas in Yemen: A comparison of OLS and WLS determinant. Small Scale Forest Econ., Manage. & Policy, 4 (1): 117-134.

  • Sharma, V.P. and Kumar, A. (2000). Factors influencing adoption of agroforestry programme: A case study from North- West India. Indian J. Agric. Econ., 55 (3): 500-510.

  • Sood, K.K. (2006). The influence of household economics and farming aspects on adoption to traditional agroforestry in Western Himalaya. Mountain Res. & Deve. , 26 (2):124-130.

  • Spore (2000). Urban and peri-urban livestock production, where the ask comes to town. Information for agricultural development in ACP countries 89.

  • Thangata, P.H., Alavalapati, J.R.R. and Hildebrand, P.E. (2004). Meta modeling agroforestry adoption. In: Valuing agroforestry systems, J. R. R. Alavalapati and D. E. Mercer (Eds.) Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. pp. 219-236.


Abstract Views: 305

PDF Views: 1




  • Socio-Economic Conditions of the Farmers

Abstract Views: 305  |  PDF Views: 1

Authors

Himshikha
Extension Division, Forest Research Institute, Dehradun (Uttarakhand), India
Charan Singh
Forest Extension Division, Forest Research Institute, Dehradun (Uttarakhand), India

Abstract


Agroforestry empowers farmers to take risk in long term investments like growing tree species and/ or rearing livestock, fluctuation in price and increase or decrease in demand and supply of agri produces. To access socio-economic conditions of both agroforestry and non agroforestry farmers, a survey was conducted in Haridwar, India. To analyze it, data pertaining to socio-economic indicators such as income level and employment, family size and community structure like land holding value, land distribution and ownership type, housing characteristics and labour resources were collected and then compared. To elaborate this comparison more, some other factors like farming and agroforestry experience, decision making, knowledge, awareness and favor to agroforestry etc. were also studied. Results revealed that approximately 97.8 per cent of sampled households were male headed. Approximately 18.90 per cent agroforestry and 34.43 per cent non-agroforestry respondents were having less than 1 ha of land. About 75.62 per cent agroforestry farmers and 67.21 per cent non agroforestry farmers considered farming as main occupation. The higher income status in categories was found more (12.60% and 27.40%) in agroforestry respondents than (6.56% and 14.75%) in non agroforestry respondents. It was concluded that higher income status enables agroforestry farmers to live their live style according to their own choice, hence, encouraging them to adopt, continue or promote agroforestry in their field.

Keywords


Adoption, Adopters, Agroforestry, Farmers, Practice, Socio-Economic.

References