ADOPTION OF IMPROVED COWPEA PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGIES IN THE AKATSI DISTRICT OF THE VOLTA REGION, GHANA BY CYNTHIA ANKU-TSEDE A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION, UNIVERSITY OF GHANA, IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF THE MASTERS OF PHILOSOPHY (M.PHIL) DEGREE IN AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION FEBRUARY, 2000 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh ■ Q 364620 pS 15 ( UjlSU )2_o University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh DECLARATION I, do hereby declare that with the exception of literature cited, which I have duly acknowledged, this thesis is entirely my original work. I further declare that no part of this thesis has been presented for a degree anywhere. ...... CYNTHIA ANKU TSEDE (STUDENT) D R O. SAKYI - DAWSON (SUPERVISOR) University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh DEDICATION This thesis is dedicated to Vincent, my Parents and Siblings, Who shared this phase of my life With me. ii University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This thesis would not have been accomplished without certain amount of support and guidance from others. It is on this note that I wish to express my sincerest gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. O. Sakyi - Dawson of the Department of Agricultural Extension, University of Ghana, Legon. He made constructive criticisms and offered useful suggestions that inspired me to work harder, and led to the completion of this work. Credit is also given to all lecturers of the Department of Agricultural Extension, University of Ghana, Legon, for their assistance and useful suggestions. Your contribution to the completion of this thesis cannot go unrecognised. Special thanks to the management and staff of Social Security Bank (S.S.B.) for their financial assistance. I also wish to thank Vincent, George, my siblings, Theodosia and my course mates (especially Abudu - Mumuni Insah) for their diverse contributions to the completion of my work. Last but not the least, I give all the glory to God, who has been and continues to be my strength, counsel and provider. I however wish to remark that any shortcomings of this thesis remain solely my responsibility. University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh ABSTRACT Enhancing the adoption of Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies (ICPTs) can contribute greatly to food security in low- income countries such as Ghana. However, although such improved technologies have been the focus of technology development and extension effort for sometime now in Ghana, there is a dearth of studies on the extent of adoption of ICPTs and its determinants. Among others, current adoption of technology literature suggests that target or potential user’s perceptions of technologies are likely to influence adoption. However, this paradigm has not been studied in Ghana for ICPTs. This thesis therefore examined the relationship between cowpea farmers’ and traders perceptions and the adoption of ICPTs in the Akatsi district of the Volta Region, Ghana. Specifically, it attempts to answer the question - how does their perceptions of characteristics of four ICPTs (namely the use Actellic liquid, Actellic dust, Phostoxin and edible oil in preserving cowpea), mode and effort of extension delivery, determine the pattern of utilization of ICPTs. Data was collected using questionnaires from sixty cowpea producers, twenty-five cowpea traders and fifteen Agricultural extension Agents (AEAs) of the Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MoFA). In addition, the Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) methods for focus group discussions, was used to collect contextual information. Data analysis included frequency distribution, chi-square tests and the Spearman’s rank order correlation co-efficient. The results show that apart from respondents gender and the quantity of cowpea stored, there was statistically no significant difference between the characteristics of cowpea producers and traders. Cowpea producers were mainly males and the traders were solely females. Traders also stored more cowpea than producers did and they stored if for a longer period of time. University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Extension agents delivery efforts on the selected ICPTs was mainly by a combination of interpersonal (individual and group) methods and contact tended to be more frequent (thrice or more within a month). However, cowpea traders were contacted less frequently than producers. Traders are however more important with regards to preservation of cowpea than producers yet, they have little access to ICPT messages. It is therefore suggested that extension agents need to direct more cowpea preservation messages to traders. There was substantial knowledge of cowpea pests and their control in the study area. Comparatively, the level of awareness of traditional cowpea preservation technologies was higher than that of ICPTs. Level of awareness of ICPTs in descending order is similar - Actellic dust, Actellic liquid, Edible oil and Phostoxin (Producers - 52%, 37%, 35%, 21% and Traders - 48%, 32%, 24%, 16% respectively). The study established that Phostoxin had a higher range of positively perceived attributes by producers and traders and edible oil had the least. Analysis of the relationship between adopter characteristics and perception of attributes revealed that with the exception of Actellic liquid, these variables did not make a difference in perception of ICPTs. The extension method used did not bring about a difference in perception of overall attributes of ICPTs but made a difference in perception of general attributes (Relative Advantage and Complexity) of Actellic liquid. With the exception of Actellic liquid, the frequency of contact of AEAs with the respondents did not bring about any significant difference in perception of ICPTs. An increase in the frequency of contact of AEAs with the respondents resulted in more positive perception of attributes of Actellic liquid but not the other ICPTs. v University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh There was a positive relationship between respondents positive perceptions of selected ICPTs and adoption levels. Producers’ perceptions of specific attributes gave the closest prediction of adoption levels whereas traders overall perceptions of attributes gave the closest prediction of adoption level. It shows that to an extent, perceptions of attributes reflect their adoption levels. It is suggested that AEAs need to re-examine and refine ICPTs, taking the negative perceptions of attributes of ICPTs and their inverse relationship with adoption levels into consideration. In order to enhance adoption of ICPTs, AEAs should deliver detailed technical knowledge, emphasising positive attributes. This can be done through regular contact (thrice or more within a month) and the use of interpersonal channels of extension delivery (use of a combination of the group and individual methods of extension delivery) for increased adoption of cowpea preservation technologies. University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh TABLE OF CONTENT DECLARATION................................ i DEDICATION............................................................................................................................ ii ACKNOWLEDGMENT...........................................................................................................iii ABSTRACT...................... iv TABLE OF CONTENT............................................................................................................vii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS................................... : ................... xii LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................................xiii LIST OF FIGURES ..'................................................... xvi LIST OF M A P S......................................................................................................................xvii LIST OF APPENDICES...................................................................................................... xviii PA RT ONE: B A C K G R O U N D CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1.0. Background Information......................................................................................1 1.1. Statement of the Problem ................................................................................... 5 1.2. Research Question............................................................................................... 7 13. Objectives............................................................................................................. 7 1.3.1. Main Objectives.....................................................................................................7 1.3.2. Specific Objectives ...............................................................................................7 1.4. Significance of the Study.................................................................................... 8 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.0 Introduction ......................................................... 10 2.1 Adoption of Innovations.....................................................................................11 2.1.1 How Adoption takes P lace................................................................................12 2.1.2 Benefits of A doption ........................................................................................ 14 2.2. Perceptions and Adoption................................................................................. 15 2.2.1 Perceptions of Characteristics of Innovations.................. ...............................15 2.2.2. How Perceptions are Established.......................................... ....................... 22 2.3. Extension Delivery .............................................................................................24 2.3.1. Extension Delivery and A doption................................................................. 24 2.3.2. Extension Delivery and Perceptions of Innovations ..................................... 26 2.4. Personal / Individual Characteristics and Adoption.....................................27 2.4.1. Personal Characteristics and perception of Characteristics of Innovations . 32 2.5. A Conceptual Model of Determinants of Adoption of Innovations........... 32 2.6 Definition of Terms ........................................................................................... 35 2.7. Conclusion.............................................................................................................36 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 3.0. Introduction .......................................................................................................38 3.1. Research Design.................................................................................................38 3.1.1. Study A re a ...........................................................................................................39 viii University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 3.1.2. Study Population .................................................................................................39 3.1.3. Sample Size & Sampling Technique................................................................. 39 3.2. Data Gathering Technique..............................................................................44 3.2.1. Development of Data Gathering Instruments .................................................. 45 3.3. Pre - Testing...................................................................................................... 49 3.4. Data Gathering..................................................................................................49 3.5. Data A nalysis....................................................................................................49 3.6. Problems Encountered During Field W ork.................................................. 52 PART TWO: RESULTS & DISCUSSION CHAPTER FOUR: CHARACTERISTICS OF COWPEA PRODUCERS, COWPEA TRADERS & AEAs 4.0. Introduction ...................................................................................................... 53 4.1. Personal Characteristics of Cowpea Producers & Cowpea Traders . . . 53 4.2. Enterprise Characteristics of Cowpea Producers & Traders....................60 4.3. Personal & Professional Characteristics of AEAs ...................................... 62 4.4. Conclusion.......................................................................................................... 65 CHAPTER FIVE : EXTENSION DELIVERY EFFORTS: 5.0. Introduction ......................................................................................................67 5.1. Prevention of Pest Infestation in Cowpea.......................................................67 5.2. Cowpea Preservation Technologies Extended by AEAs...............................80 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 5.3. Sources of Cowpea Preservation M essages....................................................82 5.4. Extension Delivery Efforts .............................................................................84 5.5. Constraints to Delivery of Cowpea Preservation M essages....................... 92 5.6. Re - Introduction of Cowpea Preservation Technologies........................... 96 5.7. Conclusion........................................................................................................... 97 CHAPTER SIX: PERCEPTION OF ATTRIBUTES OF SELECTED IMPROVED COWPEA PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGIES 6.0 Introduction..................................................................................................... 100 6.1 Level of Awareness of Cowpea Preservation Technologies......................100 6.2. Perceptions of Specific Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies.............................................................................101 6.3 Perceptions of General Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies............................................................................ 102 6.4 Perceptions of Overall Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies.............................................................................104 6.5 Characteristics and Perceptions of Attributes of Selected ICPTs 104 6.5.1 Personal Characteristics of Respondents & Perceptions of General Attributes of ICPTs ................................................................ 106 6.5.2 Enterprise Characteristics of Respondents & Perceptions of General Attributes of ICPTs ...................................................................... 107 6.6 Extension Delivery and Perceptions of Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies ......................................... 110 6.6.1 Extension Methods and Perception of Overall Attributes of Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies ...................... 110 x University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 6.6.2 Extension Method and Perception of General Attributes of Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies................................................................ 110 6.6.3 Frequency of Contact & Perception of Overall Attributes of Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies................................................................ I l l 6.6.4 Frequency of Contact & Perception of General Attributes of Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies................................................................112 6.7 Conclusion.......................................................................................................113 CHAPTER SEVEN: ADOPTION OF IMPROVED COWPEA PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGIES 7.0. Introduction ..................................................................................................... 115 7.1. Awareness - Adoption G ap.......................................................................... 115 7.2. Adopter Characteristics and Adoption ........................................................116 7.3. Extension Delivery and Adoption................................................................127 7.3.1. Method of Extension Delivery and A doption ............................................... 127 7.3.2. Frequency of Contact and Adoption ............................................................... 129 7.4. Perceptions and Adoption L evels ................................................................130 7.5. Summary & Conclusion.................................................................................133 PART TH REE: C O N C LU SIO N CHAPTER EIGHT: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS 8.1. Summary & Conclusion.............................................................................. 135 8.2. Recommendations ........................................................................................ 141 8J. Suggestions for Further R esearch ............................................................ 143 BIBLOGRAPHY................................................................................................................... 145 APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................... 161 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ADB - Agricultural Development Bank AEAs - Agricultural Extension Agents FAO - Food & Agricultural Organization FLS - Frontline Staff ICPTs - Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies ISSER - - Institute for Statistical & Social Science & Economic Research MoFA - Ministry of Food and Agriculture NAEP - National Agricultural Extension Project NAES - National Agricultural Experimental Station PHDU - Post Harvest Development Unit T&T - Travel & Transport Allowance University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Table 3.1 Information Collected, Source (s) & Techniques used in Data collection . . 45 Table 4.1 Working Experience of Cowpea Producers & Traders ............................... 57 Table 4.2 Quantity of Cowpea stored by Producers and Traders ................................. 62 Table 4.3 Position & Educational Qualification of AEAs in the Study A re a ...................64 Table 4.4 Language of Communication of A E A s ...............................................................65 Table 5.1 Disadvantage with Use of Group Extension Method by AEA’s in Dissemination of Cowpea Preservation M essage....................................... 90 Table 5.2 Disadvantage of Use of Individual Extension Method by AEA’s in Dissemination of Cowpea Preservation M essage....................................... 92 Table 6.1 Level of Awareness of Cowpea Preservation Technologies........................... 100 Table 6.2 Perceptions of Specific Attributes o f Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies ...............................................................102 Table 6.3 Perceptions of General Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies.................................................................103 Table 6.4 Perception of Overall Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies .............................................. 103 Table 6.5 Characteristics & Overall Perception of Attributes of Improved Cowpea preservation Technologies................................................ 105 Table 6.6 Personal Characteristics of Respondents and their Perceptions of General Attributes of ICPTs & of Producers..............................................107 Table 6.7 Enterprise Characteristics & Perceptions of General Attributes of ICPTs.............................................................................. 109 Table 6.8 Extension Method Used and Perceptions o f Overall Attributes of Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies .. 110 LIST OF TABLES xiii University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Table 6.9 Extension Method Used and Perceptions of General Attributes of Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies......................... I l l Table 6.10 Frequency of Contact and Perceptions of Overall Attributes o f Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies......................... 112 Table 6.11 Frequency of Contact and Perceptions of General Attributes of Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies......................... 112 Table 7.1 Gender and Adoption Levels...........................................................................117 Table 7.2. Age and Adoption ............................................................................................118 Table 7.3. Education Level and Adoption ........................................................................ 120 Table 7.4. Working Experience and adoption ................................................................121 Table 7.5. Producers Farm Size and Adoption..................................................................122 Table 7.6. Variety of Cowpea Grown or Sold and A doption...........................................124 Table 7.7. Producers Crop Yield and A doption................................................................125 Table 7.8 Quantity of Cowpea Stored and Adoption...................................................... 126 Table 7.9 Method of Delivery and Adoption................................................................... 128 Table 7.10 Frequency of Contact and Adoption ............................................................... 129 Table 7.11 Degree o f Relationship Between Producers Overall Perception of Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies and Adoption.........................................................130 Table 7.12 Degree of Relationship Between Traders Overall Perception of Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies and Adoption.........................................................130 Table 7.13 Summary of Ranking of Key Aspects of Perceived Attributes and A doption.................................................................131 Table 7.14 Ratings of Key Aspects Perceived Attributes Using Spearmans Rank Order Correlation Co - Efficient and Adoption.................132 xiv University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Fig. 2.1 A Conceptual Model of Determinants of Adoption of Innovations..........................................................................................................33 Fig. 4.1 Percentage Distribution of Respondents by Gender .........................................54 Fig. 4.2 Percentage Distribution of Respondents by A g e ...............................................55 Fig. 4.3 Educational Level of Cowpea Producers & T ra d e rs ........................................56 Fig. 4.4 Distribution of Farmers by Farm S iz e ...............................................................58 Fig. 4.5 Distribution of Cowpea Producers by Crop Y ield............................................ 59 Fig. 4.6 Variety of Cowpea Grown & Sold by Respondents ....................................... 61 Fig. 4.7 Distribution of AEAs by G ender........................................................................63 Fig. 4.8 AEAs Working Experience in Current Location............................................... 64 Fig 5. 1 A Local Sieve ( Abgadza ' ) ............................................................................ 71 Fig 5.2 A Local Keg ( 'Adjafi' ) .................................................................................... 79 Fig. 5.3 ICPTs Extended by AEAs in the Study A rea..................................................... 81 Fig. 5.4 Traditional Cowpea Preservation Technologies Recommended by Certain AEAs in the Study A re a .................................................................. 82 Fig. 5.5 AEAs Source of Cowpea Preservation Messages .......................................... 83 Fig. 5.6 Methods of Extension Delivery Used by AEAs & Frequency of Contact with Clientele................................................................ 84 Fig. 5.7 Method of Extension Delivery Producers Indicated AEAs Used & their Frequency of Contact....................................... 86 Fig. 5.8 Method of Extension Delivery Traders Indicated AEAs Used & their Frequency of C ontact..................................... 87 Fig. 5.9 AEAs Constraints to Delivery of Cowpea Preservation M essages.................92 LIST OF FIGURES xv University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Fig. 5.10 Reasons for Re-Introduction of Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies..................................................................97 Fig. 7.1 Awareness - Adoption Gap of Producers......................................................... 116 Fig. 7.2 Awareness - Adoption Gap of Traders............................................................. 116 xvi University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Map 1: A Map of Ghana Showing the Study A rea.........................................................40 Map 2: Akatsi District Map Showing Some Villages in the Study A rea ......................41 LIST OF MAPS xvii University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh . 161 , 167 173 177 179 180 180 181 182 184 186 187 188 189 APPENDICES Structured Interview Schedule for Cowpea Producers ........... Structured Interview Schedule for Cowpea Traders . . . . . . . . Agricultural Extension Agents Questionnaire......................... Focus Group Discussion ........................................................ Perceptions of Specific Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies ....................... Perceptions of General Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies......................... Overall Perception of Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies ........................................ Personal Characteristics & Overall Perception of Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies . . . Personal Characteristics & Perceptions of General Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies . . Enterprise Characteristics & Perceptions of General Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies Extension Method Used & Perceptions of Overall Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies Extension Method Used & Perceptions of General Attributes ' of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies . . . . Frequency of Contact & Perceptions of Overall Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies Frequency of Contact & Perceptions of General Attributes of Selected Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies xviii University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh APPENDIX 15A Relationship between Producers Perception of Overall Attributes of Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies and A doption 190 APPENDIX 15B Relationship between Traders Perception of Overall Attributes of Improved Cowpea preservation Technologies and A doption 191 xix University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh PART ONE: BACKGROUND University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.0. Background Information The current food crisis in Sub-Saharan Africa, which is a major cause of concern worldwide, is the result of the inability of most countries in the region to produce or purchase and stock enough food to satisfy demand owing to rapid population growth, urbanization, and rising incomes among some segments of the population (Okigbo, 1986). The need to increase productivity in sub-Saharan Africa is urgent since basic population growth in this region is out-stripping increases in food production (Pickering 1989; Dapaah, 1994). While the rate of growth in food production is increasing by 1-2% per annum, the average rate of growth of the population is 2.5% per annum (FAO World Report, 1984). In Ghana, growth in agricultural productivity is 2.1% per annum while population growth rate is 2.6 - 3.2% per annum since 1985 (Korang - Amoako, Donkor, & Amoah, 1994). The State of the Ghanaian Economy Report for 1996 indicated a prevailing underlying deficiency in food production and supply from year to year (ISSER, 1997). This indicates inadequate production of food and the need for measures to have adequate food for the population. New technologies are increasingly being viewed as the vehicle for increasing agricultural production (Sackey, 1975). Food production is therefore expected to increase as a result of the introduction and adoption of these new technologies. 1 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Whilst food production is inadequate, food security is worsened by food losses and deterioration which occur during storage, utilization and distribution of the albeit inadequate food. Most shortfalls in food supply to majority of people in developing countries have been attributed to post-harvest losses due to inappropriate drying and storage facilities. Post-harvest food loss in developing countries is estimated to be between 10-15% (Muhlbauer,1991). Post harvest losses of farm produce are known to be substantial in Ghana. Conservative estimates in Ghana have been put between 10-20% (Nicol, Darko, & Ofosu, 1997). This (post harvest loss) is a great problem in developing countries in spite of availability of modern technology. An area of major concern to both farmers and extensionists therefore is the fairly high post harvest losses of grain legumes, notably Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata). The situation is even more crucial considering the importance particularly of grain legumes. Post harvest loss of cowpea is a specially serious loss because cowpea: i. is important to the livelihood of millions of relatively poor people in less developed countries of the tropics. It is a relatively cheap source of protein especially for those who cannot afford meat regularly. In fact, it is a key staple food for the poorest sector of many developing countries (Rachie & Singh, 1985). ii. provides variety in the diet of people when eaten in various forms and combinations with other foods (especially when used in the fortification of dishes). iii. increases the nutritional status of the population - an increase in its production will help reduce the incidence of protein malnutrition. iv. processing of cowpea also offers employment opportunities for people. v. makes a significant contribution to the agricultural economy - that is, it serves as fodder for animals, replenishes soil fertility and provides ground cover to prevent soil erosion ( Rachie et. al., 1985; Hossain, 1990; Quinn, 1997). 2 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Cowpea is therefore an important crop for now and for the future thus making studies on it vital. Because of the importance of cowpea, making it more available will be beneficial especially to the poorest sector of developing countries. Availability of it will also help achieve greater food security. Cowpea constitutes about 2% of the total world output of grain legumes (Kay, 1979). It is also one of the major food crops widely cultivated in Ghana (Hossain, 1990). It is grown in all parts of the country. Ghana produces over 57,000 tons of cowpea annually, but due to the very high level of pest damage and poor storage practices amongst others, only a small fraction of what is produced becomes available for human consumption (Rachie et. al., 1985). The financial and nutritional losses of cowpea to storage pests in sub - Saharan Africa is not well documented but is clearly high (Collinson, 1993; Amegatse, 1995). The nature and extent of this post harvest loss problem therefore requires careful examination. It is necessary not only to arrest the progress of infestation in cowpea immediately after harvest, but to provide a means of protecting it up to the point of consumption (Rawnsley, 1969). Post­ harvest loss prevention is however a major but often neglected step towards offering greater volume of food on the African continent (Proctor, Goodliffe, & Coursey, 1979). Post-harvest loss prevention is advantageous in that it: i. acts as an incentive to increase crop production. ii. results in production of better quality food for the family (better nutrition). iii. leads to less waste and reduction in food losses. iv. results in more reliable food supply throughout the year. v. brings about increased income from the sale of increased quantity and better quality crops. 3 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh vi. is also an important step for developing rural areas. The need for efficient, effective, safe, and economical methods of reducing post harvest losses (especially in Ghana) has therefore become very imperative considering the population growth rate of 2.6% per annum (Appiah, 1997). There are several ways of addressing this post harvest loss problem. Some measures include, increasing production, processing and preservation of food, without changes in primary production levels. The adoption of improved preservation technologies will go a long way to address this problem. Preservation of farm produce can be effected at various levels: household level, farm level, and commercial level (including preservation by sellers). What happens at one level, however affects all other levels. In a country where a large proportion of the population is rural (that is about 75% of the population in Ghana), it is essential that prevention of post harvest losses be effected at farm level and eventually at the commercial level (Rawnsley, 1969). Improved farm storage is important because a large portion of food production is consumed locally in the producing communities. It also enhances income of producers through adequate prices and ensures household food availability during the lean season. The prevention of waste at this level would make more good quality food available for sale than would otherwise be the case. Many governments of developing countries have identified the food supply of their people as a major problem area and consequently are allocating considerable resources to the Agricultural sector. The greater part of their resources has been concentrated on increasing agricultural production and decreasing food losses to make more food available (Bani, 1991). There is little question therefore that changes must be made in production and methods of decreasing food losses (including preservation methods) in Ghana to make more food available. 4 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Ghana's Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MoFA) recognized the magnitude of the post harvest loss and its adverse effect on the country’s economy as well as on the standard of living of the people especially small -scale farmers. Thus the Post-Harvest Development Unit (PHDU) was instituted w ith in the Department of Crop Service of the Ministry of food and Agriculture (MoFA) in 1986. Its mandate is to help reduce post-harvest losses through development and dissemination of information on improved methods of storage and preservation. This it is hoped, would augment the available food supply and enable a more even distribution of food supplies over time, space and social groups. 1.1. Statement of the Problem In Ghana, an important cowpea growing area is the Akatsi District of the Volta Region. Anecdotal evidence in the district indicates that cowpea producers have problems with cowpea during storage. Most of the cowpea sold in the Akatsi market have bruchid emergence holes. In most cases such holes are due to infestation of cowpea by the cowpea beetle, Callosobruchus maculatuswalp (known erroneously as the 'cowpea weevil'). These have an effect on food quality and nutrient availability in cowpea. It is also observed that farmers often sell their cowpea at harvest when prices are lowest in the year, partly because they anticipate storage losses. This way farmers income from cowpea production is reduced. Being aware of the storage problem, it is expected that cowpea producers and distributors would be interested in better techniques for preserving their grain after harvest. MoFA in Ghana has identified and disseminated improved cowpea preservation technologies (ICPTs) involving the use of chemicals, to farmers and other households in cowpea producing 5 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh areas such as the Akatsi District, to reduce post harvest losses. They include, the use of Actellic dust (1.6% Pirimiphos - methyl; 0.3% Permethrin), Actellic 25EC liquid (25% Pirimorphos - methyl), Edible oil and Phostoxin (56% Aluminium phosphide). Numerous traditional preservation technologies are also available including the use of neem products, wood ash, pepper, quicklime and sea sand. With the availability of these preservation technologies, it should be expected that post harvest loss of cowpea would be brought under control if these technologies are used by cowpea producers and traders. Monthly reports of extension agents in the District however indicated that there are problems mainly with weevil infestation of stored cowpea in the district. It was also indicated in their reports that the chemical control of insect pests is not being widely practiced. Cowpea farmers may have recognized the usefulness of these technologies but certain factors may account for their non-utilization and this is a matter that needs to be investigated. Currently, there is a dearth of studies on the level of adoption of improved cowpea preservation technologies and its determinants. Further, little is known in terms of factors that influence the adoption o f ICPT’s and thus incorporation of these cowpea preservation technologies into the farming system in the Akatsi District. This suggests a need to determine the exact levels of adoption, and factors responsible for adoption and non-adoption of the ICPTs. An examination of literature on causes of low adoption of innovations suggests that personal characteristics of respondents, target clientele's perceptions of such technologies and the extension agents effort in dissemination of these technologies, are important factors likely to affect adoption 6 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh of ICPTs (Swanson et. al., 1984; Faye, 1991; Perse & Courtright, 1993; Rogers, 1995; Agarwal & Prasad, 1995; Reagan, Pinkleton, Chen, & Aaronson, 1995). This study therefore examined, the extent to which these factors are important determinants of adoption patterns of cowpea producers and traders in the Akatsi District, Ghana. 1.2. Research Question The main research question addressed by the study is: How do cowpea farmers and traders personal characteristics and perceptions of characteristics of ICPTs, determine the pattern of utilization of these technologies and to what extent does the mode and efforts of extension delivery influence these perceptions? 1.3 Objectives 1.3.1. Main Objective The main objective is to determine the extent to which the rate of adoption of ICPTs in the Akatsi District of the Volta Region is related to cowpea farmers and traders perceptions of the characteristics of the technologies and the mode and effort of their dissemination to cowpea farmers and traders (by Agricultural Extension Agents). 1.3.2. Specific Objectives The specific objective of the study are to: i. identify various cowpea preservation technologies in the study area, ii describe and analyse the extension delivery efforts in disseminating ICPT messages in the Akatsi District by the public Agricultural Extension Agents, iii. describe and analyse some important personal characteristics of cowpea producers and traders and Agricultural Extension Agents (AEAs). 7 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh iv determine cowpea producers and traders perceptions of characteristics of selected ICPTs. v. find out the adoption levels of ICPTs in the district. vii. determine the relationship between perceptions of characteristics of ICPTs, mode and effort of dissemination of ICPT messages, personal and enterprise characteristics and the adoption levels of ICPTs. 1.4. Significance of the Study The study would provide insights into factors that inhibit the adoption of innovations (including ICPTs). This would contribute to increasing knowledge on how to enhance the adoption of recommended ICPTs. This would be achieved by incorporating considerations of perceptions in the technology development and dissemination stages of development of the cowpea commodity sector. Insights into the effect perceptions have on adoption decisions could assist those responsible for implementing new information technology. Examination of extension delivery efforts would also alert extension agents to the possibilities that some categories of stakeholders in the cowpea sector may require more intensive extension efforts. An understanding of the relative importance of alternate communication channels in influencing perceptions would help extension agents make better informed and more effective resource allocation decisions with regards to their choice of extension methods. The rest of the thesis is structured in the following way. A review of literature on adoption of innovations as well as its determinants are discussed in Chapter Two. Chapter Three describes the methodology of the study. These have been presented as Part One of the thesis. Data University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh analysis, results and discussions are presented in Chapters Four, Five, Six, and Seven respectively. These have been presented as Part Two of the thesis. The summary, conclusion and recommendations are presented in Chapter Eight and this is Part Three of the thesis. 9 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 2.0. Introduction: Several theoretical and empirical approaches to characterize factors influencing adoption exist in literature (Feder, Just, & Zilberman, 1985; Feder & Umali, 1993). Most of these studies focus on socioeconomic characteristics as key determinants of technology adoption decisions (Voh, 1982; Lee & Stewart, 1983; Osuntogun, Adeyemo & Anyanwu, 1986; Norris & Batie, 1987; Poison & Spencer, 1991; Baidu - Forson, 1999). Other studies indicate the influence of personal characteristics and communication on adoption behavior ( Fliegel, 1984; Faye, 1991; Perse & Courtright, 1993; Reagan, Pinkleton, Chen, & Aaronson, 1995;). Certain studies also indicate the effect of extension delivery on adoption ( Rahm & Huffman, 1984; Swanson el. al., 1984, Rogers, 1995; Agarwal & Prasad, 1995) While such factors are important, the majority of studies ignored subjective assessments of characteristics or attributes specific to the technology themselves and their effect on adoption behavior (Adesinah & Zinnah, 1993). Adesinah & Zinnah (1993) showed that fanners perceptions of characteristics of agricultural technologies strongly influence farmers adoption behavior. This “adopter perception” paradigm or model suggest perceived attributes of innovations condition adoption behavior (Kivlin & Fliegel, 1966b; Adesinah & Zinnah, 1993 ; Adesinah & Baidu - Forson, 1995). The limited number of empirical studies on the subject (using the ‘adopter - perception paradigm’) as it concerns agricultural technology adoption justifies further investigation to assess its general University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh applicability for adoption studies especially in developing countries agricultural settings. Thus necessitating a further study into how perceptions influence the adoption of ICPTs in the study area. This chapter gives a review of literature on the determinants of adoption of innovative technologies. The determinants include: perceptions of characteristics of technologies, extension delivery efforts and the personal characteristics of respondents. 2.1. Adoption of Innovations “Innovation” is a term defined in several ways. It is a new idea, method , practice or technique, perceived as new by an individual which provides the means of achieving sustained increases in farm productivity and income (Adams, 1982). The idea may not be a new one altogether but if it has not been accepted by an individual, to that person, it is an innovation ( Adams, 1982; Rogers, 1995; Melkote, 1997). It is therefore the newness of the idea to the individual that determines his reaction to it. Adoption on the other hand is a decision to make full use of an innovation as the best course of action available (Lionberger, 1968; Rogers & Burdge, 1972, Rogers, 1995). It is also defined as the process through which the individual arrives at a decision to adopt or reject an innovation from the time they become aware of it (Melkote, 1997). ■ It is not a simple unit act, but rather a complex pattern of mental activities combined with actions taken before an individual fully accepts or adopts a new idea (Bohlen, 1966). After an innovation has been introduced, the individual does not accept it immediately but needs time to think things over before making a decision . This mental process an individual hypothetically passes through from first hearing about an innovation to forming an attitude towards the innovation, is referred to as the “adoption process” or the “innovative - decision process” (Rogers, 1995). The individual either decides to reject or adopt an innovation or confirm his adoption decision. 11 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 2.1.1. How Adoption Takes Place There are several views about what the process of adoption entails. Now there is a relatively wide acceptance of the proposition that people go through a minimum of five stages while adopting innovations (Wilkening, 1952; Bohlen, 1966; Maunders, 1972; Van den Ban & Hawkins, 1985; Kwon & Zmud, 1987; Rogers, 1995; Melkote, 1997). The stages of the adoption process are; i. Awareness - This is the stage at which the individual recipient is exposed to the idea but lacks complete information about it (Melkote, 1997). Awareness of the innovation compels potential adopters to seek further information. ii. Information — This is the stage at which the individual seeks further general information regarding the innovation, apparently because there is more interest * regarding the innovation (Kwon & Zmud, 1987; Melkote, 1997). Information is sought on why and how the innovation works, how much it costs, how it compares with other ideas purported to perform the same way among others. iii. Evaluation - The individual mentally weighs the advantages and disadvantages of using the innovation in his own circumstances or in the light of the existing conditions into which the practice would have to fit. He considers his resources and management ability and decides whether he has the necessary resources to adopt the idea. If he feels it will maximize his goals and objectives, he makes the decision to give the idea a try (Wilkening, 1952; Melkote, 1997). iv. Trial - At this stage, the innovator tests the innovation on a small scale in his own situation (Lionberger, 1968; Melkote, 1997). 12 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh v. Adoption - This is the stage at which the individual decides the new idea, product or practice is good enough for continued use on a fall scale basis in his operation. It has been observed that though these steps or stages are clearly defined, they are not necessarily a rigid pattern or exclusive category with no overlap, but there may be overlaps thus one cannot identify the beginning of one stage from the other (Maunders, 1972; Van den Ban & Hawkins, 1985). In other words, they do not represent discrete or distinctly separate stages in the individual adoption process. What the stages do is however a useful way of describing a relatively continuous sequence of action, events and influences that intervene between initial knowledge about an idea, product, or practice and the actual adoption of it (Lionberger, 1968). The results of the adoption process is as follows: i. Adoption This can be classified into two: full adoption and partial adoptioa a. Full Adoption This is the full use o f an innovation as the best course of action available (Rogers, 1995) or 100% utilization of an innovation by an individual. b. Partial Adoption This is the use of certain aspects of an innovation or less than 100% utilization of an innovation by an individual. ii. Rejection This is a decision not to adopt an innovation (Rogers, 1995). This may occur at any stage in the adoption process, a. Discontinuance This is a decision to stop using an innovation after previously adopting it. It can occur only after the adoption process is completed. It may also occur when an individual becomes dissatisfied with an innovation or because the innovation is replaced with an improved idea. (For instance replacing traditional cowpea preservation technologies with improved cowpea preservation technologies). 13 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh b. Continued Adoption This is a decision to adopt an innovation after previous rejection. It is noteworthy that rejection or adoption of an idea may be temporary. An innovation could be adopted after previous rejection or rejected after previous adoption (Rogers, 1995). 2.1.2. Benefits of Adoption People adopt innovations for various reasons. These include psychological, sociological, and economic reasons. Psychologically, adoption of an innovation results in the individual gaining new experience, recognition, better life for their children and greater efficiency. It also enables individuals meet emergency needs (Maunders, 1972). Sociologically, adoption results in higher social status, greater prestige, sociability and role expectancy. Economically, adoption results in higher incomes for farmers, lower real prices of agricultural products for consumers and greater economic efficiency (Akinwumi, Adesinah, & Baidu - Forson, 1995). This increase in income would enable individuals educate their children, have more consumer goods (that is more comfort and prestige). Economically, it results in better homes, higher levels of living, more earning power, better occupational efficiency (Maunders, 1972). Adoption of innovations also results in the satisfaction of learning. A set of skills when learned, would help motivate adults to tackle more difficult skills (Maunders, 1972). Adoption of innovations is also one of the most important means of accelerating material development in economies with large agricultural sectors. This is why the adoption of technological innovations in agriculture has attracted considerable attention among development scholars and practitioners. The benefits indicated are likely to motivate individuals to adopt innovations including ICPTs. 14 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 2.2. Perceptions and Adoption Perception as defined by Berelson & Steiner (1964), is what must be added to and subtracted from input to produce our picture of an output or the more complex process by which people select, organize and interpret sensory stimulation into a meaningful and coherent picture of the world. Crider, Goethals, Kavanaugh & Scott (1989) also defined perceptions as a closely related process by which the brain selects, organizes and interprets information about the environment, brought by the senses. Perceptions could also be said to be a process of creating meaningful patterns from raw sensory information (Morris, 1985). Wortman, Loftus & Marshall (1988), however defined perceptions as the process whereby the brain gives order and meaning to the sensation it receives. It was simply defined by Yussen & Santrock (1983), as the interpretation of what is sensed through taste, touch, sight, hearing, smell and the message it brings. The primary function of perceptions is to help individuals make sense of information received. It also allows us impose a logic and order on the chaos of the millions of stimuli that bombard our senses (Crider, 1989). Perceptions influence farmers adoption behavior and need to be taken into account in adoption studies (Adesinah & Zinnah, 1993). Since there are varying definitions o f perceptions, for the purpose o f this study, the operational definition of perceptions of characteristics of ICPTs is a complex process by which individuals or people select, organize and interpret what is sensed in the environment into a meaningful and coherent picture about the characteristics of ICPTs. 2.2.1 . Perception of Characteristics of Innovations Extensive work in innovation - adoption has highlighted the key role of perceptions in adoption ofinnovations (Swanson et.al., 1984; Rogers, 1995; Agarwal & Prasad, 1998). Rogers (1995), 15 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh indicated that the characteristics of an innovation, has a great influence on the adoption of innovations. He indicated that it is the characteristics of the innovation not as seen by experts but as perceived by the potential users, that really matters and these specific characteristics of the technology continue to be an important factor affecting adoption behavior. A decision to adopt is predicated upon the technical characteristics of the innovation: Relative Advantage, Compatibility, Complexity, Trialability, and Observability. These five characteristics are somewhat interrelated but are conceptually distinct (Rogers, 1995). The crucial role played by such perceived characteristics in driving the adoption decision has been recognized in a variety of research (Davis, 1989; Moore&Benbasat, 1991; Saga & Zmud, 1994; Rogers, 1995; Melkote, 1997; Agarwal & Prasad, 1998) including the study of the adoption of cowpea preservation technologies in the Akatsi district. Relative Advantage Relative advantage captures the extent to which the potential adopter views the innovation as offering an advantage over previous ways of performing the same task (Akinwumi, Adesina & Seidi 1995; Agarwal & Prasad, 1998). It is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as better than the idea it supersedes (Rogers 1995; Melkote, 1997). The individual critically assess the characteristics of the technology against those of existing local technologies and only adopt the former if they are judged superior to the latter for some critical attributes. Relative advantage is expressed in terms of its cheapness, it being time, labor and money saving or the financial advantage of applying an innovation. It should provide income and there should be no marketing problems. Recent empirical studies in the information technology domain support the importance of relative advantage in predicting adoption behavior (Davis 1989; Davis, Bagozzi & Warshaw, 1989; Moore 16 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh & Benbasat, 1991; Adams, Nelson & Todd, 1992; Keil, Beranek & Konsynski, 1995) It is often expressed in terms of its economic profitability. A number of studies have been made to measure the importance of profitability of a practice as it affects the rate at which the practice is adopted. (Fliegel, Frederick & Kivlin, 1962; Grilliches, 1957, Havens & Rogers, 1961). Those practices that are perceived to have a high marginal return, tend to be adopted more rapidly than practices which have low marginal returns. It is worth mentioning however that the nature of the innovation may determine what specific type of relative advantage (eg. economic, or social) is important to adopters (Wilkening & Johnson, 1961). For instance the major advantage of two 4 - D weed sprays over previous methods of farm weed control was a reduction in unpleasant labor requirements rather than a direct financial gain from higher crop yields (Rogers, 1962). Sutherland (1959) also showed that a cotton spinning innovation was adopted more quickly by English firms because of the labor shortage in World War II. Betrand (1951) found that the crisis of unionized farm laborers and war time labor shortages aided the rate of adoption of farm mechanization in Louisiana. It is worth mentioning however that, it matters little if the innovation has a great degree of advantage over the idea it is replacing. What matters is whether the individual perceives the relative advantage of the innovation at all. Compatibility Compatibility was proposed as a characteristic of an innovation and a good predictor of adoption Moore & Benbasat, 1991; Rogers, 1995; Melkote, 1997). It is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as being consistent with the existing values, needs, and past experiences of potential adopters (Rogers, 1995; Melkote, 1997). The taste, texture and color of the final products must 17 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh be in line with existing ones. The innovation should not disrupt prevailing social, cultural and religious life but blend with it. The more compatible a practice is with the existing farming operations, the more likely it will be to be adopted quickly (Lionberger, 1968), The more change required however in the existing operation, the more slowly it will be adopted (Lionberger, 1968). Several investigations show compatibility affects the rate of adoption. Santopolo (1961) for instance reported the difficulty encountered by Kentucky County Agents in convincing farmers to switch from tobacco - growing to pickle - raising. Even though the latter crop was more profitable, it was not adopted because cucumbers were perceived by’ farmers as a feminine type of enterprise. On the other hand, raising tobacco, which was less profitable, was prestigious so more people adopted that innovation. Parish (1954) also found that Australian farmers adopted mechanical innovations more rapidly than non - mechanical innovations because the former was more compatible with their needs. Prundeanu & Zwerman (1958) and Lionberger (1960) found that soil conservation practices that were mainly production increasing and required a minimum of maintenance (eg. tilling) were adopted more quickly by New York farmers than such conservation practices as terracing and contouring. Farmers values tend to be more compatible with mechanical innovations and with those that increase production. Complexity Complexity, recurs in several studies as a significant determinant of adoption behavior (Davis, Bagozzi & Warshaw, 1989). Complexity is similar in definition to Agarwal & Prasads' (1998) notion of'ease of use' and encapsulates the degree to which a potential adopter views usage of the target technology to be relatively free of effort (Davis, Bagozzi & Warshaw, 1989). Simply it is defined as the degree to which an innovation is understood and can be used by farmers. 18 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Melkote (1997) defines it as the degree to which an innovation was relatively difficult to understand and use. Innovations that are perceived to be easier to use , simpler to understand and less complex have a higher likelihood of being accepted and used by potential users than innovations that require adopters to develop new skills and understanding (Lionberger, 1968; Rogers, 1995; Agarwal & Prasad, 1998). Studies by Kivlin (1960), suggests that the complexity of farm innovations was highly related (in a negative direction) to their rate of adoption than any other characteristics o f an innovation except its relative advantage. Graham (1956) sought to determine why Canasta and television diffused at different rates in the upper and lower classes. He concluded that one reason was the difference in complexity of the two ideas. Canasta had to be learned through detailed personal explanation from other card players. Its procedures were complex and difficult to master. Television however appeared to be a relatively simple idea that required only the ability to turn a knob. Trialability Technologies must lend themselves to be tried on a limited basis. Trialabilty is the degree to which an innovation could be tried on a limited basis (Rogers, 1995; Melkote, 1997). .This factor is apparently most important for the majority of fanners who wish to try practices on a small-scale basis in their own situation, before adopting it on a large scale (Bohlen, 1966). I f farmers try out without committing too much money, they may adopt the innovation quickly (Adams, 1982). Traits or practices that are readily communicated by conventional methods are more likely to be adopted than those that are not (Lionberger, 1968). Costly and complex practices that can be taken a little at a time, are also likely to be adopted more quickly than in situations where this is not possible. 19 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Ryan & Gross (1943) found that every one of their Iowa farmer respondents adopted hybrid seed com by first trying it on a partial basis. If the new seed could not be sampled experimentally, its rate of adoption was much slower. Another evidence suggests that the killing effect of a new insecticide could be easily understood and convincingly demonstrated (Rogers, 1962) thus resulting in its adoption. An example is also an Ohio farmer who tried a new feed on his entire dairy herd for one week. He then compared milk production with that of previous weeks and after realizing the benefits, adopted the technology (Rogers, 1962). Nevertheless some innovations are more difficult than others to divide or try and their trialability is likely to influence the adoption of ICPTs. Observability This is the degree to which the results of an innovation are visible to others. The easier it is to see the advantages of an innovation, the more likely he is to adopt it (Melkote, 1997). One illustration of this generalization is the case of pre - emergent weed killers that are sprayed on a field before the weeds emerge from the soil. The rate of adoption of this idea has been slow by Midwestern farmers, in spite of its relative advantage because there are no dead weeds the farmer can show his neighbor (Rogers, 1962). Hruschka (1961) rated, farm innovations into four categories of observability in an investigation of the role of demonstration farmers in diffusing new ideas in German villages. The ideas which were rated as more communicable for instance haymaking techniques, diffused more readily from the demonstration farmers to surrounding villagers than less communicable techniques like keeping of farm records. Erasmus (1961) also showed the visibility of innovations is particularly important in affecting its rate of adoption in less developed preliterate society. In 1951 for 20 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh example the point four program in Bolivia introduced Cuban Yellow Corn in one town and within two years the local demand for the seed far exceeded the supply. The farmers were mostly literate but were convinced to adopt by spectacular results of the new seed which often tripled com yield. The results were so highly visible and widely discussed that more scientific comparison of the new idea was not necessary to convince the local villagers to adopt (Rogers, 1962). The results of the use of a practice (observability) affect its adoption in varying degrees. Those people who have a low ability to mentally handle abstract ideas for instance tend to be more reluctant to adopt practices that do not produce highly visible outcomes when used whiles those with high ability to mentally handle abstract ideas tend to adopt practices once the outcome is highly visible (Bohlen 1966). All five perceptions are relative concepts and not innate attributes of the innovation, and can be perceived differently by different individuals. People’s perceptions may affect their adoption far more than the technical characteristics of innovations. Innovations that are perceived by individuals as having greater relative advantage, compatibility, trialability, observability and less complexity will be adopted more rapidly than other innovations (Rogers, 1995). Past research indicates these five qualities are the most important characteristics of innovation in explaining the rate of adoption (Rogers, 1995). Perceptions are influenced by our personal characteristics, extension delivery, values, beliefs, attitudes, and objective assessment of the characteristics of innovations (Adams, 1982). They play a different role in adoption for different individuals (Agarwal & Prasad, 1998). Although several perceptions have been proposed and to a limited extent shown to be predictors of adoption behavior, only three have consistently emerged salient (Agarwal & Prasad, 1998). These are the perceptions of the relative advantage, compatibility and complexity of the innovations. 21 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 2.2.2. How Perceptions are Established Numerous factors lead individuals to organize perceptions in an orderly manner. Perceptions are established through exposure, experience and learning. The empiricist view holds that the perceptual process is largely a matter of learning. Learning is the demonstration of a relatively permanent change in behavior that occurs as a result of practice or experience (Gerow, 1995). An example of the empiricist view is the claim that babies enter the world with little or no ability to perceive things in the environment and gradually, they learn to infer adult like perceptions on the basis of the cues the environment provides. Learning is therefore an explanation of the reason why people perceive things as they do. Others are of the view that it is partly a result of what we are exposed to and our experiences (Wortman et. al., 1988). Klapper (1960), suggested people exposed themselves to messages selectively. There was a tendency for individuals to expose themselves relatively more to those items of communication that were consonant with their beliefs, ideas, values among others (Melkote, 1997). The exposure in effect helped them in the establishment of their perceptions of things in the environment. The early experience of individuals also affects the way one perceives the world (Crider, 1989). In agricultural extension, learning experiences are made available to clientele by AEAs. They expose their clientele to information on innovations through the use of extension teaching methods and frequent contact with clientele. These learning experiences and contact help influence the way farmers and traders perceive the attributes of innovations they are exposed to. 22 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Perceptions and Adoption The importance of attribute perceptions has long been of interest to social scientists investigating agricultural technology adoption decisions ( Akinwumi et. al., 1995). As indicated earlier, the decision to adopt is predicated upon five key perceptions of the characteristics of innovations: relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability (Rogers, 1995). Indeed various authors have argued using qualitative methods, that fanners' subjective assessment of agricultural technologies influence adoption behavior ( Kivlin & Fliegel, 1966; Nowak, 1992) Economist investigating consumer demand have accumulated considerable evidence showing that consumers generally have subjective preferences for characteristics of products and that their demand for products is significantly affected by their perceptions of the products’ attributes (Jones, 1989; Lin & Milon, 1993). For example, using a double - hurdle model, Lin & Milon (1993) found that commodity attributes and consumers’ safety perceptions were significant in explaining decisions to consume and the frequency of consumption of shellfish in the USA. Similarly, Jones (1989) found using Cragg's double - hurdle framework, that consumers' subjective perceptions influenced cigarette smoking decisions. In their recent study, Adesina & Zinnah (1993a) found that farmers perceptions of the characteristics o f modem rice varieties significantly affected adoption decisions in Sierra - Leone. Although extensive reviews of adoption studies show a relationship between perceptions and adoption, the paucity of empirical studies on this issue as it concerns agricultural technology adoption, justifies further investigation especially in developing countries agricultural settings (Adesinah & Zinnah, 1993). Thus necessitating a further study on the extent to which the rate of adoption of ICPTs is related to the perception of the characteristics of ICPTs in the Akatsi District. 23 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 2.3. Extension Delivery The adoption of an innovation is an activity entailing extensive communication and requires the use o f extension channels (Zmud, 1983). These extension methods are required to awaken a desire for change and to give the clientele self confidence to embark on what they may see as a dangerous or relevant undertaking (Adams, 1982). Individuals are posited to use these channels for uncertainty reduction and information gathering, which are critical to facilitating innovation - adoption (Rogers, 1983). AEA’s use these channels to create learning experiences through which their clientele develop perceptions which ultimately lead to adoption or non - adoption of innovations. 2.3.1. Extension Delivery and Adoption Educational techniques or methods exist from which extension agents choose to set up learning conditions so as to influence the target groups to acquire skills and to transfer information. These methods are classified into three main categories and these are the individual, group and mass methods(Maunders, 1972; Adams 1982; Van den Ban & Hawkins 1985; Kwarteng & Zinnah 1995; Rogers, 1995 ). Rogers (1995), who explicitly addresses the role of communication channels in innovation adoption, distinguishes between two broad channel types. These are the mass media channel and the interpersonal channel. These communication channels are responsible for dissemination of two kinds of information about an innovation: general knowledge about the innovation (mass media channel), as well as specific knowledge that is personalized for individuals (interpersonal channel). The mass media channels enable large amounts of information to reach a wide audience (for example, the mass extension method). It is also relatively effective in creating awareness about the overall worth of the innovation in general and fostering pro - innovation attitudes (Rogers, 1995). Awareness does not connote simply acknowledging the 24 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh existence of an innovation but reflects a generally favorable attitude toward the innovation. The mass media channel is however too general to provide the specific kinds of reinforcement that an individual needs to confirm his or her beliefs about the innovation. The individual and group methods are examples of interpersonal channels. It involves customized communication and is focused on the expected personal outcomes of adopting the innovation. Interpersonal channels help provide specific reinforcement that individuals need to confirm their belief about an innovation, and consequently, can be more valuable in developing individual perceptions about innovations ( Rogers, 1995; Agarwal & Prasad, 1998). Several studies have shown the significant effect of extension delivery on adoption (Jamison & Lau, 1982; Feder & Slade, 1984; Jamison &Moock, 1984; Rahm &Huffinan, 1984). Farmers are known to gain from access to improved information provided through extension (Birkhaeuser et. al., 1991). Extension delivery makes a substantial contribution to motivating adoption or intensity of use of technologies (Akinwumi et. al., 1995). It is visualized as the important link through which exogenous ideas enter the local communities (Melkote, 1997). It also accomplishes many things including creating a necessary condition for bringing about most desired changes in individuals; and providing information, motivating and persuading clientele of the need for, and usefulness of a technology (Fliegel 1984; Adhikanya et al. 1987). Comparative analysis of studies ( Adesina & Zinnah, 1993a; Rogers, 1995) show some important patterns in the role of extension and farmer contact variables in influencing farmers adoption decisions. It was realized that extension had very little to do with technology diffusion: this occurred mainly through farmers self - experimentation, evaluation, exchange and transfer. In the 25 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh case of sorghum in Burkina Faso (Adesina, Baidu - Forson, 1995), extensive on - farm testing of varieties in a number of test - villages appears to have affected adoption decisions. Tins suggests that extension workers do not influence technology transfer in all cases. Farmers are also important as sources of technology information and agents of technology transfer. When farmers assess the characteristics of new technologies and find them to match their preferences, they often give the technologies to other farmers to test and evaluate thereby setting into motion an endogenous process of technology diffusion (Adesina & Baidu - Forson, 1995). As is evident from substantial quantity of work in this , area, persuading individuals to adopt technological innovations is a matter of considerable importance for organizations (Agarwal & Prasad, 1998) including MoFA. Individuals are persuaded by AEAs to try out new practices or innovations. They create learning experiences using different extension methods or communication channels and frequent contact. Extension delivery therefore plays a central role in adoption of innovations. Effective extension delivery programs must thus be used to disseminate relevant information including information on the use of ICPTs, to the selected target audience and to convince them of the benefits of adopting. Initiating the chain of events leading to adoption of improved practices is therefore a principal challenge for extension agencies. Thus justifying further investigation into its effect on adoption of ICPTs. 2.3.2. Extension Delivery and Perception of Characteristics of Innovations Although the role of communication channels in innovation adoption has been recognized by prior research (Zmud, 1983; Nilakanta & Scamell, 1990), there is a dearth o f knowledge on the effect of communication channels on perceptions (Agarwal & Prasad, 1998). Zmud (1983) examined the effects of many different varieties of external information channels in facilitating the adoption of modem software practices among systems professionals, however, his study did not look at the 26 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh effects of these channels on the development of perceptions. The study by Nilakanta and Scamell (1990) of database development practices was similar in that it did not include a consideration of perceptions. Although these two studies did examine the effects of both communication sources as well as channels on adoption decisions, the distinction they drew between channels and sources was not clear and it did not study the effect of perceptions on adoption behavior (Agarwal & Prasad, 1998). Since perceptions are established through learning (Gerow, 1995), the communication channel or method of extension delivery used in exposing individuals to learning experiences determines how people perceive the attributes of the innovation and subsequently their adoption of these innovations. In addition to this, the frequency of contact with their clientele would also influence adoption of innovations. It is reasonable therefore to assume that any messages or information transmitted about an innovation would be focused on emphasizing such positive value; and hence, depending on the channel, would serve to heighten and sharpen either positive awareness or positive perceptions about innovations. In addition to examining the effect of communication channels on adoption decisions therefore, the study hopes to examine the effect of these channels on the perceptions of attributes of ICPTs (something extensive studies on communication channels and perceptions has not investigated). 2.4. Personal / Individual Characteristics & Adoption The major actor in the agricultural production drama is of course, the individual farmer. Male or female, young, or old, more or less educated, each farmer is ultimately a unique individual with a host of characteristics that may affect how information is received, processed and either used or not used in the production process (Fliegel, 1984). Adoption is not necessarily the same across 27 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh all users, but may vary based on the characteristics of the users (Perse & Courtright 1993, Reagan, Pinkleton, Chen & Aaronson 1995). In communication adoption studies, it is usual to investigate personal characteristics of respondents in order to understand its relative influence on adoption behavior (Faye, 1991). This helps explain why some people adopt new ideas and practices more quickly than others. The following personal characteristics were examined: Age, Educating Sex, Working experience because they would help us to an extent to understand the adoption behavior of respondents. Age: The age o f farmers has been found to have indeterminate effects in various adoption studies (Feder & Slade, 1985). Younger fanners have been reported as having greater likelihood of adopting new technologies due to their longer planning horizon ( Bultena & Hoiberg, 1983; Feder & Slade, 1985) than older farmers. However, it may also be that with age, farmers accumulate more personal capital and, thus show a greater likelihood of investing in innovations. With younger farmers on the other hand, they may desire to make changes in farming but are not always in a position to do so because of capital restrictions or because final decisions may rest with money lenders or with the person who owns the farm (Lionberger 1968). Older farmers may be elders in the village and may have preferential access to new information or technologies through extension services or development projects that work in the villages. Onu, (1991), however found out that farm information sources use decrease with increased age of farmers. This implies young fanners are more alert to attaining information from sources that discuss more ways of improving their vocation than older farmers. 28 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Older fanners may have more skills in assessing innovations ( Akinwumi, Adesina & Seidi 1995) but are somehow less inclined to adopt new farm practices than younger ones because they are less receptive to change (Copp, Sill, & Brown, 1958; Lionberger, 1968), Although evidence indicates older fanners are less receptive to change than younger ones, failure to adopt new practices does not necessarily mean that they are not receptive to change but issues like health, declining energies and pending retirement may dictate their actions not being in accord with maximization of income and profit (Lionberger, 1949). The foregoing shows evidence of the inconsistent relationship between age and innovativeness. Among several studies reviewed: half show no relationship between age and innovativeness; 19% support the hypothesis of younger people favoring adoption and 33% support hypothesis of older people favoring adoption of innovations (Rogers, 1983). Baidu - Forson's (1999) study for instance revealed that age had no significant effect on the adoption of'tassa' and earthen mounds shaped in the form of half crescent which have been improved with the concentration of biological and chemical inputs. The result was indicated to be contrary to the observed negative influence of age on adoption of biological and chemical inputs because of the conservative outlook of older farmers (Cotlear, 1986). This contrary observation confirms the inconsistency of evidence about the relationship between age and innovativeness thus necessitating further studies into this relationship. Education: Illiteracy amongst the target group can be a severe setback to the delivery and adoption of technologies in developing countries (Merrill - Sands, 1989). Generally people share the basic belief that education can cure most ills of society. It has been valued as a means of increasing knowledge about new farm technology. The assumption is that schooling facilitates learning, 29 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh which in tum is pressured to instill a favorable mental atmosphere for the acceptance of new practices (Lionberger, 1968). Education imparts new knowledge that might otherwise not be acquired from social experience. The level of education will therefore enhance his understanding and the likelihood of utilization of a technology. The proper application of information on agricultural technologies such as agro-chemicals, inorganic fertilizers as well as new varieties require users to process complex procedural information. Prior knowledge enables inferences to be made. Eisemon (1990) reporting on his work in Kenya, noted that compression of procedures for applying agro-chemicals, for instance, communicated orally or through printed texts, is influenced by schooling. Lack of education therefore would be a drawback in the processing and extension of information. Research suggests that adoption is moderately and/or strongly related to the educational level (Lin & Jeffres, 1998). Research work indicates adoption was moderately and/or strongly related to the educational level of respondents (Evenson, 1974; Mehra, 1994; Abdelmagid Hassan, 1996 ; Lin & Jeflres, 1998) Individuals with some level of education normally accept innovations more than the uneducated ones. Education is therefore an important factor that influences the acceptance of new ideas by farmers (Onu, 1991). It was suggested that farmers with better education are earlier adopters of modem technologies and apply modem inputs more efficiently throughout the adoption process than the late adopters who are mostly the older and less educated farmers (Abdelmagid & Hassan, 1996). Some indirect inferences to support this assertion can be made from studies by Lockheed, Jamison & Lau (1980) This study found significant relationship between education indicators and farm productivity. Thus since adoption of innovations increases productivity, the effect of education on adoption can be implied. Education acts as an essential 30 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh triggering input for other activities to occur effectively. The educational level of individuals therefore enhances his understanding and acceptance of an innovation. It enables the learner to feel competent and confident. These qualities are important for the success of the extension program (Blackburn, 1989). This is because measures carried out without the understanding of the recipient meet with lack of interest, mistrust or rejection (Albrecht et al., 1989). Sex Sex has an influence on the acceptance and utilization of extension messages. In sub-Saharan Africa including Ghana, there is a gender division of labor (Mehra, 1994). Certain agricultural tasks are allocated to men and women. Men may help initially in serious stage of clearing the bush, cutting trees among others but the remaining agricultural work which includes hoeing, weeding, tilling soil, harvesting and preservation are womens responsibilities (Benor D. et al., 1985). Wolfson et al., (1990), reported important gender differences with respects to cowpea storage practices. They found women were much more likely to take active measures to preserve their cowpeas than men farmers. They also found a strong association between the gender of the person storing cowpeas and the method used ( eg. women use proportionally more methods than men do). Where the message is not directed to the appropriate sex therefore, it is likely to fail (Mehra 1994) Sex therefore is likely to influence, the adoption o f innovations including ICPTs. Working Experience A store of knowledge is obtained through experience over the years. As farmers' accumulate experience it can be expected that this would positively influence their decision - making skills. Any new knowledge that extension agents are willing to impart must fit into the adults experience 31 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh which may result in a conflict emanating from change (Bohlen, 1966). This may contribute to the reluctance of older adults to accept and utilize information as it is in the late majority and laggards categories of the adoption curve (Bohlen, 1966). Basu (1969) however revealed that there was no correlation between professional experience and adoption. 2.4.1. Personal Characteristics and Perception o f Characteristics o f Innovations A review of literature suggests that there is a dearth of studies showing the relationship between personal characteristics of individuals and the perception of attributes of innovations. This calls for further studies in this area. Research in social psychology has shown that personal characteristics can moderate the development of behavioral intentions ( Liska, 1984). It is implied from this that the relationship between perceptions and the adoption decision for individuals can potentially be moderated by personality factors ( Agarwal & Prasad, 1998). 2.5. A Conceptual Model of Determinants of Adoption of Innovations Numerous authors (Lionberger, 1968; Swanson, Rolings & Jiggins, 1984; Osuntogun, Adeyemo & Anyanwu, 1985; Rogers, 1995), have identified factors that influence the adoption behavior of farmers. In the study, the following modified model adopted from Osuntogun et. al., (1985), was formulated to explain determinants of adoption. Adoption of ICPT’s can be viewed as a variable which is a function of: a = Personal & Enterprise Characteristics of Respondents b = Extension Delivery Efforts c = Perceptions of Characteristics of ICPTs U = Error or disturbance term Thus: Y, = f(a, b, c, U ) 32 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh It is postulated that the extent to which the use of improved cowpea preservation technologies is adopted, can be determined by personal and enterprise characteristics, mode and effort of extension delivery (that is the frequency of contact and extension methods used), and potential adopters perception of characteristics of improved cowpea preservation technologies. Personal characteristics of respondents and extension delivery efforts (that is the frequency of contact and extension methods used), determine respondents perceptions of characteristics of ICPTs. The research model underlying this study is shown in Figure 2.1. S O C I O E C O N O M I C C O N T E X T Figure 2 .1 . Conceptual Model of Determinants of Adoption of Innovations 33 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Description o f Variables The dependent variable ( Y ,), the adoption index for each respondent, was ICPTs adopted for preservation of cowpea. These include adoption of Actellic liquid, Actellic dust, Phostoxin, and Edible oil. The personal and enterprise characteristics of respondents (a) is indexed by Xj - x8 which is Gender (x^ , Age (in years - x2), Educational level (x3), Working Experience (x j, Farm size (X5), Crop Yield (x )̂ Variety of Cowpea Grown/Sold (x1)> Quantity of Cowpea Stored (xg). a = f( x, - x8). It is hypothesized that the effect of personal and enterprise characteristics on adoption, can either be positive or negative for a particular respondent. Extension delivery ( b) is measured in terms of Xj x10, which is the Extension Method Used (x,) and the Frequency of Contact of AEAs with Clientele within a Month ( x10). b = f(x, x,0). It is postulated that the relationship between extension delivery and adoption of improved cowpea preservation technologies, will be positive if respondents are contacted with multiple methods of extension delivery and are in very frequent contact with AEAs within a month. This is because the more ways people are exposed to extension information, the larger the acceptance of recommended practices (Maunders, 1972). With frequent contact also, AEAs are likely to enlighten respondents on improved cowpea preservation messages thus they would be more aware of the benefits of adopting the technologies. Potential adopters perception of characteristics of improved cowpea preservation technologies (c) is measured in terms of the following variables c = f(xn - x,5) which are, Relative Advantage, Compatibility, Complexity, Trialability, and Observability. 34 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh General Attributes 1. Relative Advantage (xn) 2. Compatibility (x12) 3. Complexity (x13) 4. Trialability (x14) 5. Observability (x15) Specific Attributes - Income yielding - Length of storage ( Shelf-life) - Work-involved in use of the technology Time involved in use of technology - Effectiveness of technology Marketing problems - Similarity to existing practices - Difference in taste after preserving ( Taste ) - Smell of chemical ( Smell ) - Ease in understanding technology - Ease of use - Piloting cost - Generation of curiosity Visibility of advantage of using ICPTs 2.6. Definition of Terms: i. Adoption This is a decision at an individual cowpea preservation technology users level to make use of an ICPT as the best course of action available as indicated by utilization or non - utilization of a particular selected ICPT. ii. Extension Delivery This is the method used in conscious communication of agricultural information and the frequency of contact of extension officers with farmers and traders who use ICPTs. iii. Perception This is the selection, organization and interpretation of what is sensed in the environment, into a meaningful and coherent picture. This enables the individual to give meaning to information received. 35 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh iv. Perception of Characteristics of ICPTs This is the selection, organization and interpretation of what is sensed about the characteristics of ICPTs. The characteristics include: relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability of ICPTs. This enables the individual to give meaning to information received about ICPTs. v. Improved Cowpea Preservation Technologies These are cowpea preservation technologies, recommended by staff o f the public extension agency, to keep seed in a good condition for a long time. 2.7. Conclusion A review of determinants of adoption behavior revealed that perceptions, extension delivery efforts and the personal characteristics of individuals influence the adoption of innovations. The role of different types of communication channels in facilitating information - technology adoption has also been investigated by others but these studies have typically examined the effects of communication channels on adoption decisions without taking perceptions into account. Consequently, little literature was obtained on the role of perception in adoption of innovations and this highlights the need for further studies. The review revealed that other variables affect perceptions of attributes of innovations and these are likely to influence the adoption of innovations. This includes awareness of innovations, which was realized to be a crucial prerequisite to the development of specific positive perceptions which in turn lead to innovation adoption. There was however a dearth of knowledge on the effect of extension delivery and personal characteristics on the perception of characteristics of innovations. If these are ignored in adoption studies, the results of the study may be biased. This explains why 36 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh the study included these factors. This limited number of empirical studies on the subject using this adopter - perception model especially as it concerns agricultural technologies (including improved cowpea preservation technologies) justifies further investigation to assess the general applicability of the framework for adoption studies in the Akatsi District of Ghana. 37 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY 3.0. Introduction: This chapter outlines activities undertaken to achieve the objectives of the study. It indicates how data was collected, analysed and interpreted to deduce a conclusion. The study sought to identify how cowpea farmers and traders perceptions of characteristics of ICPTs determine the pattern of utilisation of these technologies and to what extent the mode and efforts of extension delivery influence these perceptions. 3.1. Research Design: A research design is a plan that guides the investigator while collecting, analysing and interpreting observations (Yin, 1988). It is the logic that links the empirical data to be collected, and the initial question of study to its conclusion (Yin, 1988). The study design is a case study. The case study involves an intensive study of one or more cases considered typical or representative in the area of investigation of a larger number of cases - in this instance, the case is the adoption of improved cowpea preservation technologies in the Akatsi district of Ghana ( Chitamber, 1983). The primary purpose of a case study is to determine the factors, and relationships among the factors that have resulted in the current behaviour pattern of the subject of study (Chitamber, 1983). Since the objectives of the study were similar to the primary purpose of case studies, this design is suitable for carrying out the research. The design was again chosen because the type of research question and the focus of the work was on contemporary events in which behaviour cannot be manipulated as opposed to historical phenomena (Yin 1981a, 198 lb). In the case study design, more than one strategy was used within the study. 38 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh 3.1.1. Study Area: The study was carried out in the Akatsi district of the Volta Region. The district is located in the south - eastern part of the Volta Region. It lies between latitude 6°S - 7°N and Longitude 0°W - 1°E. (Refer to Maps 1 and 2). This district was chosen because it is one of the major cowpea growing areas in the Volta Region. The researcher also speaks the same language as the people. The only barrierto communication was a difference in dialects. 3.1.2 Study Population The target population for the study comprised all: - Cowpea producers living and farming in the southern and middle part of the district. Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MoFA) extension agents working with farmers within the district. - Cowpea traders in and outside the district, who sell cowpea at the Akatsi market. 3.1.3. Sample Size & Sampling Technique: Cost, time, transportation and representativeness were the over riding factors determining the sample size in this study. Thus a sample that represented the target population with least cost, time and transportation constraints was used. 39 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Map 1: A MAP OF GHANA SHOWING TH E STUDY A R E A : AKATSI DISTRICT 40 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh M A P 2 : A K A T S I D I S T R I C T M A P SHOWI NG SOME V I L L A G E S IN T H E S T U D Y A R E A 0° 40' 0° 50 1 1° 00’ To Ho R E P U B L O F T O G O - 6 ° 2 0 ' -6° 10* - 0° 00' Xevi © / ) P " J 0- Dzokpo / X \ Dakpa°^\ \ ' X \ 7 \ A g b a n y o k o p e A f la d e n y ig b a c \ T 6° 20’- ) / „ W u t e \ \ \ ) A d o k p o V \ - S ^Ga v as h i ko pe *. O \ Morv i V To Sogakofe “ / Korve o ^ / V ) Laabokofs ^ I ' ; / \ AkatsiY^ / ̂ * A t i d z i v i e / 1 To A f l a o 6° 10’- / ^ Duepe / *. Ali. il£ ili J I I 10 KM 0°, 4 0 1 0° 5 0' --------------F i r s t C l as s Road -------------- T h i r d C l ass Rood — • I n t e r n a t i o n a l Boun dar y — • • — D i s t r i c t B o u n d a r y i U jU M a r s h y A r e a • Some of the v i l l ag es s t u d i e d . ° O t h e r t o w n s / v i 11 a g e s . i°, 00' 41 University of Ghana http://ugspace.ug.edu.gh Cowpea Producers: Sixty (