Communication and adoption of innovations in a remote and an accessible village in Pakistan : a comparative study

Abstract

The study was conducted in an accessible (village - 1l) and a remotenvillage (village-2) of the North West Frontier Province in Pakistan.The main objectives were to examine the differential patterns ofndiffusion and adoption and the social and communication networks in thentwo villages.All the farmers present during the interview period (72 in accessiblenand 60 in remote village), were personally interviewed with the help of anpre-tested questionnaire in Urdu, during September-November 1981.Data was processed and analysed on a PDP-10 computer using relevantntests from a Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS).Twelve innovations related to the High Yielding Varieties (HYV) ofnwheat were selected for testing individually and as a package. Thenfindings are :1.n nFarmers in th.e accessible village became aware of HYV three yearsnearlier (1967) than those in the remote village (1970).2.n nSome of the farmers in the accessible village adopted HYV in the samenyear as their first awareness, but it took two years after awarenessnfor the early adopters to plant HYV in the remote village.3.n nOn average, the time lag between awareness and adoption of HYV in thenaccessible village was 21 months, compared to 50 months in the remotenvillage.4.n nAlthough farmers' rate of awareness in 1980 (14 years after firstnawareness) was the same (98%) in both villages, a significantly higher level of adoption, and a larger number of adopters (92%) of HYV wasnfound in the accessible village than in the remote village (70%)5.n nChemical fertilizer was adopted 10 years earlier in the accessiblenvillage (1960) than the remote village (1970). The level ofnfertilizer adoption and the number of fertilizer users was significantlynhigher in the accesssible village (97%) than the remotenvillage (78%).6.n nBecause of the lack of cash, fertilizer users were not consistentnin their adoption behaviour and created a category of temporarynadopters or non-adopters.7.n nNo significant difference in the level of adoption or the number ofnadopters of seed treatment and weed control measures was found becausenof recent introduction of chemicals and frequent shortages. However,nthe number of herbicides users was greater (20%) in the accessiblenvillage than in the remote village (11%) .8.n nTotal adoption of the package was significantly higher in the accessiblenvillage with the majority (86%) , having an adoption score ofnnine to 17 (mean 11. 4), as compared to the remote village with thenmajority (84%), having an adoption score of one to eight (mean 5.7).nOverall, significantly more farmers adopted a larger number ofnpractices from the package in the accessible village than in thenremote village.n n n n n n n n n n