Abstract

A package of innovations was disseminated in urban agriculture and created real opportunities for employment, income, and the supply of vegetables of high nutritional quality. However, ten years later, farmers are working for a daily income of less than United State Dollars 1.25, and critical exceedances of heavy metal content standards in crops are recorded. Survey data collected from 202 farmers were used to identify, via the Logit model, the factors influencing the sustained adoption of the of two contrasting innovations of the package. The results of the exploratory survey of 537 farmers showed that 2.42% owned a motor pump, while the in-depth survey revealed that 25.2% of the 202 respondents were using motor pumps at the time of the survey. A total of 74.8% watered with buckets and watering cans. The high cost of the motor pump makes it inaccessible to farmers. Some tried to circumvent this constraint, which led to group purchases. Integrated soil fertility management was used by 58.4% of respondents. In total, 41.6% applied only chemical fertilizers. However, Integrated soil fertility management has been hampered by farmers’ difficulties in accessing organic matter. The results of the Logit model revealed that no socio-demographic factors were significant for sustained adoption of the motor pump. They were relevant, rather, for integrated soil fertility management, where a single factor (mutual aid) appeared to play a role, albeit a moderate one. Economic factors such as land tenure status and diversification of income sources were significant for a sustained adoption of the motor pump. In contrast, no economic factors were significant for a sustained adoption of the integrated soil fertility management. Institutional factors such as access to credit and membership in an association were significant for sustained adoption of the two of innovations studied. A series of avenues to follow to improve the productivity of farms is proposed. We suggest an in-depth study of the mutual aid practiced by 86.1% of the farmers. The results of this study can be taken into account in research and policy aimed at improving adoption of innovative techniques that are beneficial to farmers in developing countries.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call