Understanding farmers' perceptions on advisory services in Tanzania: Comparative insights from principal component analysis and Q-methodology

被引:0
作者
Goodluck, Annette [1 ]
Otieno, David Jakinda [1 ]
Oluoch-Kosura, Willis [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Nairobi, Dept Agr Econ, POB 29053-00625, Nairobi, Kenya
基金
英国科研创新办公室;
关键词
Perceptions; Agricultural advisory services; Principal component analysis; Q-methodology; Tanzania; AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION; SUSTAINABILITY PERSPECTIVES; MANAGEMENT; INNOVATION; DISCOURSES; CONFLICT; QUALITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e34541
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Agricultural advisory services help farmers to access farming skills, technologies and agricultural markets. The services are offered by different actors, who all together form the pluralistic advisory service providers. In recent years, pluralistic advisory service providers have emerged in various developing countries including Tanzania. Pluralistic providers have different institutional arrangements and varying levels of effectiveness, which lead farmers to have diverse perceptions towards them. However, the perceptions of farmers on pluralistic advisory services have not been fully documented, making it difficult to gauge the level of acceptance of the diverse services offered. This paper employs principal component analysis (PCA) and Q-methodology to elicit farmers ' perceptions on the pluralistic services using samples of 627 and 23 farmers, respectively. Results from both methods showed that pluralistic providers offered diverse services ranging from production to market information. Further, the two approaches provided concurring findings that advisory services offered did not meet farmers ' advisory demands. Furthermore, each method served to fill the shortcomings of the other. Therefore, we recommend a complementary application of both approaches rather than treating them as mutually exclusive in the analysis of perceptions.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 74 条
  • [71] When and how to use Q methodology to understand perspectives in conservation research
    Zabala, Aiora
    Sandbrook, Chris
    Mukherjee, Nibedita
    [J]. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2018, 32 (05) : 1185 - 1194
  • [72] Sowing Q methodology in the rural global South: a review of challenges and good practices
    Zambrano, Juan Carlo Intriago
    Diehl, Jan Carel
    Ertsen, Maurits W.
    [J]. COGENT SOCIAL SCIENCES, 2024, 10 (01):
  • [73] Land-Use Conflict in the Gran Chaco: Finding Common Ground through Use of the Q Method
    Zepharovich, Elena
    Ceddia, Michele Graziano
    Rist, Stephan
    [J]. SUSTAINABILITY, 2020, 12 (18)
  • [74] Small farming and generational renewal in the context of food security challenges
    Zmija, Katarzyna
    Fortes, Arlindo
    Tia, Moses Nganwani
    Sumane, Sandra
    Ayambila, Sylvester Nsobire
    Zmija, Dariusz
    Satola, Lukasz
    Sutherland, Lee-Ann
    [J]. GLOBAL FOOD SECURITY-AGRICULTURE POLICY ECONOMICS AND ENVIRONMENT, 2020, 26