DETERMINANT OF SMALL SCALE FARMERS

ADOPTION OF IMPROVED TECHNOLOGY IN ETHIOPIA

A senior seminar paper

Submitted To

Dilla University Collage Of Agriculture And Natural Resource.

DEPARTMENT of AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS

By

Zeyneba Mohammed id no

075/16

Advisor

Tadele A(MSc)

Jouanary, 2019

Dilla, ETHIOPIA
Table content

Content page

ACKNOLODGEMENT................................................................................................................................................................. iv

ABBRIVATION and ACRONYM..................................................................................................................................................v

ABSTRACT..................................................................................................................................................................................... vi

INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background of the Review....................................................................................................................................................1

1.2 Justification........................................................................................................................................................................... 2

1.2.1 Significance...................................................................................................................................................................2

1.2.2 Statement of problem.....................................................................................................................................................2

1.3 Objective............................................................................................................................................................................... 2

1.3.1 General objective...........................................................................................................................................................2

1.3.2 Specific objectives.........................................................................................................................................................2

2, LITERATURE REVIEW.............................................................................................................................................................3

2.1 Theoretical Review……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……..……..3

2.2 Emperical Review………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3

2.3. Factors Influencing Agricultural Technology Adoption............................................................................................................4

2.3.1 Economic Factors............................................................................................................................................................... 5

2.3.2 Credit Constraints.......................................................................................................................................................... 5

2.3. 3 Cost of Technology...................................................................................................................................................... 5

2.3.4 Level of Expected benefits............................................................................................................................................6

2.4 Social Factors........................................................................................................................................................................6

2.4..1 Age of Adopter.................................................................................................................................................................. 6

2.4.2 Education.......................................................................................................................................................................6

2.4.3 Gender Concerns...........................................................................................................................................................7

2.4.4 Institutions..........................................................................................................................................................................7

2.4.5 Information....................................................................................................................................................................7

2.4.6 Extension Contacts........................................................................................................................................................ 8

2.4.7 Climate............................................................................................................................................................................... 8

ii
3. CONCLUSION And RECOMMENDATION… ………………………………………………………………………………..9

3 .1 Conclusion........................................................................................................................................................................... 9

3.2 Recommendation.................................................................................................................................................................10

4. Reference ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..11

iii
 ACKNOLODGEMENT

First of all, I would like to thanks to ALLAH for being with us in all aspects of our life, especially in our academic life. After that
I would like to thanks to our adviser for his valuable advice, insight and guidance from the initiation to the completion of this
senior seminar.

iv
ABBRIVATION and ACRONYM

(CSA)- Central Statistical Agency

(EEA)- Ethiopian Economic Association
(FAO)- Food and Agricultural Organization
(GDP)- Growth domestic product
(IFPRI)- International food policy research institution
(IPM)- Integrated Pest Management
(MDG)- Millennium Development Goal
MoFED Ministry of Finance and Economic Development
(RBST)- Recombinant Bovine Somatotropin Technology
(WB)- World Bank
(WFP)- World Food Program

v
ABSTRACT

Major economic and social measures have shown that agriculture is the dominant sector in the Ethiopian economy. Concerning
the situation of rural producers of a developing Ethiopia adoption of agricultural technology is urgently required. Adoption of
agricultural technology is an outcome of a decision to accept a set of ‘new ideas’ in a given innovation of agriculture. The
adoption of agricultural technologies, especially in subsistence farming, would be governed by a complex set of factors such as

vi
economy factors, institutional factors, and social factors. Within this frame condition, farmers’ decision depends on their needs,
cost incurred and benefit accruing to it would be the major motivating factors for the acceptance or rejection of a particular
improved technology.
Econometric analysis of new agricultural technology adoption indicates that, holding other factors constant, households with
memberships in agricultural associations and access to agricultural advisory services and rural credit are more likely to adopt
new agricultural technologies. Under economic factors includes access to credit, cost of technology, benefit of technology and
Off-farm hours. Social factors that affect adoption is age, education and are the most once. Institutional factors deal with the
extent or degree to which institutions impact on technology adoption by smallholders. Institutions include all the services to
agricultural development, such as finance, insurance, information dissemination and Extension Contacts.

vii
 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Review

Agriculture is the basis of Ethiopia economy. It contributes to over 50 percent of the GDP and 90 percent of raw materials
requirement of the country's small and medium-sized industries. It is also estimated that agriculture provides employment for
about 85% of labour force (MEDaC, 2005)
Major economic and social measures have shown that agriculture is the dominant sector in the Ethiopian economy. In Ethiopia,
economic development cannot be realized if proper attention is not given to the agriculture sector.
Despite its highest share in the country’s economy, the performance of the agricultural sector is very poor. The land productivity
is low with an average yield of 1.23tons/ha for food grains. The sector is dominated by small holder agriculture, which is
characterized by the use of traditional technologies, poor resource base, and rain fed production system (CSA, 2004).
Concerning the situation of rural producers of a developing and under developed countries like Ethiopia adoption of agricultural
technology is urgently required to increase the productivity so as to meet the increasing demand of food (cereals and animal
products) for rapidly growing population. The adoption of agricultural technologies, especially in subsistence farming, would be
governed by a complex set of factors such as human capital, information, location, resource endowments and institutional
support. Within this frame condition, farmers’ decision depends on their needs, cost incurred and benefit accruing to it would be
the major motivating factors for the acceptance or rejection of a particular technology (KARKI, 2004).

In a dynamic environment, it is argued that farmers encounter considerable inefficiencies before the realization of the intended
gains from technological change. In other words, there is a time lag between farmers’ adoption of a new technology and
achieving efficient use of that technology. Knowledge of the extent and causes of such inefficiencies among adopters of
improved technology will guide policy makers to help increase agricultural production by designing more effective and efficient
institutional support services. In an effort to raise agricultural production and productivity, policy makers in developing countries
have placed substantial emphasis on new production technologies and their adoption by farmers (Ashenafi 2006).
Majority of households (85%) in Ethiopia are smallholders who live in the rural areas and depend on agriculture as their major
economic activity. They are involved in crop or livestock production, or both, where livestock provide draught power for crop
production, and crop residues are used as animal feed (CSA, 2004).

The development strategy of the Ethiopian government aims to ensure greater food security through increased use of improved
agricultural production technologies, including fertilizer, improved seeds, chemicals, and improved cultural practices, however,
while various incentive measures have been used to induce farmers to achieve a high rate of adoption of the chosen modern
technologies. Technologies must be adopted, which occurs only when they add value to the individuals, firms, industries, and
nations who adopt them.
To understand the role of technology, it is important to understand the adoption process. Understanding the factors that affect
adoption and knowing how benefits are likely to be distributed allows technology-promoters to target their programs (Arega,
2005).
In the developing world, research has been significantly less, especially compared to the importance of these systems among
farmers globally. So, it becomes essential to review factors affecting adoption of agricultural technology (Arega, 2005).

1
1.2 Justification

1.2.1 Significance

This review is important to know factors affecting adoption of agricultural technology by reviewing different books, journals,
research papers, and research thesis. The review enables us how to organize and summarize ideas from different sources. And
also putting this seminar paper as a source for any body that needs information and knowledge about factors affecting adoption of
agricultural technology in Ethiopia.

1.2.2 Statement of Problem

The country has a moderate agricultural potential which has not yet been used appropriately. The total land area of the country is
112 million hectares out of which 65 percent have agricultural potential, but only 22 percent of it has been used. The country’s
agriculture is highly dependent on the vagaries of nature, especially the availability of rain fall. Even if the country is said to have
high irrigation potential, only less than 5 percent of it is used (Ashenafi, 2006).
1.3 Objective

1.3.1 General Objective

 To review factors that affect adoption of agricultural technology in the farmers
1.3.2 Specific Objectives

 To review socio-economic factors affecting adoption of agricultural technology

 To review institutional factor affecting adoption of agricultural technology
 To review climate factors affecting adoption of agricultural technology

2
2, Literature Review
2.1 Theoretical Review

Adoption of new agricultural technology has attracted the attention of development economists and policy makers nowadays
since it is believed that introduction of new technology increases production and productivity and technology transfer helps to
achieve economic growth for economic developing countries. Analysis of intensity adoption for new technology require careful
evaluation of a large number of technical, political and socio-economic factors to identify determinants of whether and when
farmers adoption decision takes place.
Technology is define as the general knowledge or information that permits some tasks to be accomplished, some service
rendered, or some products manufactured explain that it is the actual application of that knowledge that would be termed
‘technology.’
The focus was nonagricultural; this definition fits agricultural technologies too. From their definition, it is clear that technology is
aimed at easing work of the entity to which it applies. Most technologies are therefore consequently termed ‘labor-saving’, ‘time-
saving’, ‘capital-saving’ or ‘energy-saving’ and so forth. To economists this implies saving on resources that are scarce.
2.2 Emperical Review
According to(Dessalegn, 2008) define the term “technology” in a variety of ways uses the words ‘technology’ and ‘innovation’
synonymously and defines technology as the design for instrumental action that reduces the uncertainty in the cause-effect
relationship involved in achieving a desired outcome. A more meaningful definition may be that a technology is a set of ‘new
ideas’. New ideas are associated with some degree of uncertainty and hence a lack of predictability on their outcome.
For a technology to impact on the economic system, blending into the normal routine of the intended economic system without
upsetting the system’s state of affairs is required. This entails overcoming the uncertainty associated with the new technologies. It
therefore comes as no surprise that several studies set out to establish what these factors are, and how they can be eliminated (if
constraints) or promoted (if enhancers) to achieve technology adoption. Perhaps a clearer definition of the term ‘technology’ can
be obtained from the work by (Enos and Park, 2006).
Adoption is an outcome of a decision to accept a given innovation while quoting defines adoption as “a mental process an
individual passes from first hearing about an innovation to final utilization According to (Zilberman, 2006),.

Much scholarly interest on adoption falls in two categories: rate of adoption, and intensity of adoption. It is usually necessary to
distinguish between these two concepts as they often have different policy implications. Rate of adoption, the relative speed with
which farmers adopt an innovation, has as one of its pillars, the element of ‘time’. On the other hand, intensity of adoption refers
to the level of use of a given technology in any time period. Clearly, a technology that is being adopted has an edge over
conventional practices. Usually, a technological innovation encompasses at least some degree of benefit for its potential adopters.
Adoption process is the change that takes place within individual with regards to an innovation from the moment that they first
become aware of the innovation to the final decision to use it or not. Adoption does not necessarily follow the suggested stages
from awareness to adoption; trial may not always practiced by farmers to adopt new technology (Journal, 2012).

Farmers may adopt the new technology by passing the trial stage. In some cases, particularly with environmental innovations,
farmers may hold awareness and knowledge but because of other factors affecting the decision making process, adoption does
not occur. The decision to adopt an innovation is not normally a single instantaneous act; it involves a process. Adoption is a
decision-making process, in which an individual goes through a number of mental stages before making a final decision to adopt
an innovation. Decision-making process is the process through which an individual passes from first knowledge of an innovation,

3
to forming an attitude toward an innovation, to a decision to adopt or reject, to implementation of new idea, and to confirmation
of the decision (Tadesse, 2008).

Awareness of a need is generally perceived as a first step in adoption process. The other stages are: Interest, Evaluation,
Acceptance, Trial, and finally, Adoption. The analysis also notes that these stages occur as a continuous sequence of events,
actions and influences that intervene between initial knowledge about an idea, product or practice, and the actual adoption of it.
However, not all decisions involve a clear-cut sequence. In fact most recent literature suggests that these stages may occur
concurrently and some may/not occur in adoption decision processes (Jackline, 2008).
technology is constantly being developed at almost all levels of the food production, distribution and retail chains, the need to
provide small-scale agriculturalists (especially in developing countries confronted with problems of food deficiency) with basic
appropriate technology needed to improve their production capacity seems to be overwhelmingly supported (World Bank 2007).

According to (Cameron, 2006) the dynamic process of adoption involves learning about a technology over time. In fact many
innovations require a lengthy period often of many years from the time they become available to the time they are widely
adopted. The average time between initial information and final adoption varies considerably by person, place and practice.
The potential benefits of a new technology can only be realized when it is adopted and used; the adoption decision involves a
critical comparison of perceived benefits and costs associated with the technology

According to Feder adoption may be defined as the integration of an innovation into farmers’ normal farming activities over an
extended period.

2.3. Factors Influencing Agricultural Technology Adoption

A variety of studies are aimed at establishing factors underlying adoption of various technologies. As such, there is an extensive
body of literature on several factors have been found to affect adoption. These include economic, climate change, social,
institutional factors and delivery mechanism. Age of potential adopter, social status of farmers, education level and gender-
related aspects, household size, and farming experience; Management factors: membership to organizations, the capacity to
borrow, and concerns about environmental degradation and human health of farmers; Institutional/technology delivery
mechanisms: information access, extension services, and prior participation in, and training in pest control practices. Some
studies classify the above factors into broad categories: farmer characteristics, farm structure, institutional characteristics and
managerial structure (Jackline, 2008).

Agricultural practices are not adopted in a social and economic vacuum brought in yet another category of classification. He
categorizes factors influencing adoption as informational, economic and ecological. Here is no clear distinguishing feature
between elements within each category. Actually, some factors can be correctly placed in either category. For instance,
experience as a factor in adoption is categorized under ‘farmer characteristics’ under ‘human capital characteristics’ (Caswell ,
2008).

Perhaps it is not necessary to try and make clear-cut distinctions between different categories of adoption factors. Besides,
categorization usually is done to suit the current technology being investigated, the location, and the researcher’s preference, or
even to suit client needs. However, as some might argue, categorization may be necessary in regard to policy implementation.
Extensive work on agricultural adoption in developing countries was pioneered. Since then the amount of literature on this

4
subject has expanded tremendously. Because of this extensive literature, the following section provides a review of selected
factors as they relate to agricultural technology adoption (Babcock, 2009).

2.3.1 Economic Factors

The contribution of new technology to economic growth can only be realized when and if the new technology is widely diffused
and used. Diffusion itself results from a series of individual decisions to begin using the new technology, decisions which are
often the result of a comparison of the uncertain benefits of the new invention with the uncertain costs of adopting it. An
understanding of the factors affecting this choice is essential both for economists studying the determinants of growth and for the
generators and disseminators of such technologies. A national representative data set from rural area covering (Jack line, 2008).

Econometric analysis of new agricultural technology adoption indicates that, holding other factors constant, households with
memberships in agricultural associations and access to agricultural advisory services and rural credit are more likely to adopt new
agricultural technologies. Changes in technology adoption are associated with changes in extension access and changes in credit
access as well as initial status of farm household in terms of access to credit and access to extension services. A lack of assets will
limit technology adoption “If you have money, every thing with you other wise you can not acquire what you want” (Journal,
2012)

2.3.2 Credit Constraints

The major option for increased adoption of technology is to overcome the income/ capital constraint through increased credit
provision. Credit is one of factors that affect the probability of adoption of improved agricultural technology by small scale
farmers (Legesse,; Tesfaye and Shiferaw, 2007)

Access to credit is an indicator which manifests itself in other factors, such as farm size (since a farmer can borrow more money
against a larger farm than a smaller farm, all other things being equal), human capital (because farmers with more education are
better informed about credit practices and can even shop around for competitive interest rates), and tenure (since a sharecropper
does not own land, and cannot borrow against its value). (Daku, 2009).

2.3.3 Cost of Technology

The decision to adopt is often an investment decision this decision presents a shift in farmers’ investment options. Therefore
adoption can be expected to be dependent on cost of a technology and on whether farmers possess the required resources.
Technologies that are capital-intensive are only affordable by wealthier farmers and hence the adoption of such technologies is
limited to larger farmers who have the wealth. Costs lowering the price of other inputs and raising agricultural product prices
improving smallholder farmers’ access to finance for agricultural development adopting a package approach to provision of
agricultural development technologies and development and rehabilitation of infrastructure for agricultural inputs and product
(Rosegrant, 2005).

5
Therefore adoption can be expected to be dependent on cost of a technology and on whether farmers possess the required
resources. Technologies that are capital-intensive are only affordable by wealthier farmers and hence the adoption of such
technologies is limited to larger farmers who have the wealth (Khanna, 2009)

In addition, changes that cost little are adopted more quickly than those requiring large expenditures; hence both extent and rate
of adoption may be dependent on the cost of a technology. Economic theory suggests that a reduction in price of a good or
service can result in more of it being demanded ((El Oster and Morehart, 2007).
2.3.4 Level of Expected benefits

Programs that produce significant gains can motivate people to participate more fully in them. In fact, people do not participate
unless they believe it is in their best interest to do so. Farmers must see an advantage or expect to obtain greater utility in
adopting a technology. In addition, farmers must perceive that there is a problem that warrants an alternative action to be taken.
Without a significant difference in outcomes between two options, and in the returns from alternative and conventional practices,
it is less likely that farmers, especially small-scale farmers will adopt the new practice. Farmers may receive little long-term
benefits from adoption, which negatively influences adoption. A higher percentage of total household income coming from
the farm through increased yield tends to correlate positively with adoption of new technologies (Fernandez and Cornejo,
2006)

2.4. Social Factors

2.4.1 Age of Adopter

Age is another factor thought to affect adoption. Age is said to be a primary latent characteristic in adoption decisions. However
there is contention on the direction of the effect of age on adoption. Productive age was found to positively influence adoption of
technology (DEBRA, 2007).
2.4.2 Education

Studies that have sought to establish the effect of education on adoption in most cases relate it to years of formal schooling.
Generally education is thought to create a favorable mental attitude for the acceptance of new practices especially of information-
intensive and management-intensive practices. Frequently stated to be a complex technology Indicates that technology
complexity has a negative effect on adoption. However, education is thought to reduce the amount of complexity perceived in a
technology thereby increasing a technology’s adoption according to Ehler and Bottrell (2008).
Farmers’ knowledge of insect life cycles is also crucial when precision is required about the best stage of the life cycle to apply a
particular control strategy. In addition, knowledge of the possible dangers from improper use of particular practices may direct
farmers to the safest application procedure regarding a given control strategy especially where chemicals are involved. The
ability to read and understand sophisticated information that may be contained in a technological package is an important aspect
of adoption. In the case of IPM, the ability to comprehend pesticide application instructions and proper measurement required in
certain control strategies becomes useful. Furthermore, distribution of knowledge reduces the risk of adopting a new technology.
Increased education is thus expected to improve IPM adoption (Daku, 2009) .Education positively affected adoption.

6
2.4.3 Gender Concerns

Gender issues in agricultural production and technology adoption have been investigated for a long time. Most show mixed
evidence regarding the different roles men and women play in technology adoption (jack line, 2008).

Results of studies in have shown that male headed households have more access to land, education, and information on new
technologies. There is a strong association between the gender of the household head and adoption of technological
recommendations (journal, 2012).

2.4.4 Institutions

Institutional factors deal with the extent or degree to which institutions impact on technology adoption by smallholders.
Institutions include all the services to agricultural development, such as finance, insurance and information dissemination. They
also include facilities and mechanisms that enhance farmers’ access to productive inputs and product markets. Institutions also
include the embedded norms, behaviors’ and practices in society. Researchers and development practitioners should also consider
issues that relate to the farmers’ exposure to economic, agro-meteorological, biophysical and social shocks in designing
technologies for smallholders. Care should be taken to avoid technologies with a high investment cost structure which
smallholders cannot afford because they are poor and lack the necessary resources. For example, the practice that the production
of certain types of crops are the preserve of male members of society can limit the adoption of a particular technology in Sub-
Saharan Africa if the crop to be promoted is grown mainly by men. This is because women constitute the majority of rural
dwellers in this part of Africa. Clearly therefore, an understanding of local cultural practices and preferences is important if they
are to benefit from agricultural research (Meinzen and Dick, 2004).

Interactions need to be created between government departments, non-governmental organizations, researchers, donors and local
communities in implementing programs that promote smallholder farmers’ adoption of technologies which can increase
agricultural productivity and reduce environmental degradation and the deterioration of soil quality. Measures that can be taken
to increase adoption of yield-enhancing technologies include lowering fertilizer. A situation has consequently arisen where the
disseminated messages to the majority of the extension audience, have become technically redundant and obsolete. An additional
problem is that most extension services tend to focus on the well-resourced, wealthier farmers and perceive farmers as simply
agents of change ( Nkonya, 2004).

2.4.5 Information

Farmers need knowledge about the benefits of a piece of technology to be able to make decisions on whether or not to adopt it. In
many parts of Ethiopia the avail- ability of this knowledge to farmers may be constrained by a number of challenges: the
remoteness of an area may limit the availability of information on a piece of technology; and limited economic resources may
mean that farmers or farming communities may not have access to information through certain forms of mass media like
television, print media, internet, and others(Beckford 2012).
Information plays a key role in the adoption of agricultural technologies. Information about a technology can come from own
experience and/ or external sources. Information from external sources comes from formal institutions such as BoARD, NGOs,

7
and the mass media or through informal mechanisms such as farmer’s organizations or networks of friends, relatives and
acquaintances. Adoption and diffusion process comprises hearing about an innovation to final adoption of the technologies. The
heart of the diffusion process is modeling and imitation by potential adopters of their near friends and groups who have
previously adopted a new idea. In deciding whether or not to adopt an innovation, we all depend mainly on the communicated
experience of others much like ourselves who have already adopted. These subjective evaluations of innovations mainly flow
through interpersonal networks. For this reason, we must understand the nature of networks if we are to comprehend the diffusion
of innovations fully (Dessalegn, 2008).
Exposure to information about new technologies as such significantly affects farmers’ choices about it. Indicate how, provided a
technology is profitable, increased information induces its adoption. However in the case where experience within the general
population about a specific technology is limited, more information induces negative attitudes towards its adoption, (Jackline,
2008).

Information is acquired through informal sources like the media, extension personnel, visits, meetings, and farm organizations
and through formal education. It is important that this information be reliable, consistent and accurate. Thus, the right mix of
information properties for a particular technology is needed for effectiveness in its impact on adoption (Feder and Slade, 2006).
2.4.6 Extension Contacts

Good extension programs and contacts with producers are a key aspect in technology dissemination and adoption. A recent
publication stated that “a new technology is only as good as the mechanism of its dissemination” to farmers. Most studies
analyzing this variable in the context of agricultural technology show its strong positive influence on adoption (IFPRI, 2009).
Major problems is that year after year extension workers who are hardly afforded in-service training, and are loosely linked to
research, continue to disseminate the same messages repeatedly to the same audience (Mkandawire, 2004).

2.4.7 Climate

Challenged by multitudes of factors of which climate related disasters like drought and flood, which often causes famine, are the
major ones. The knowledge of the adaptation methods and factors affecting the perceptions to climate change enhance policy
towards tackling the challenges that climate change is imposing on Ethiopian farmers. Some attempts have been made to study
the impact of climate change on Ethiopian agriculture. Identified potential adaptation measures to cope with adverse impacts of
climate change on crop and livestock production but failed to indicate the factors which dictate the choice of any of the
adaptation measures implied (Temesgen, 2008).

Agriculture is negatively affected by climate change to climate change refers to adjustment in natural or human systems in
response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial opportunities.
Common adaptation methods in agriculture include use of new crop varieties and livestock species that are better suited to drier
conditions, irrigation, crop diversification, adoption of mixed crop and livestock farming systems, and changing planting dates
identified potential adaptation measures for coping with adverse impacts of climate change on crop and livestock production, but
it failed to indicate the factors that dictate the choice of adaptation measures (Kurukulasuriya, 2006).

8
3. CONCLUSOIN AND RECOMMENDATION
3 .1 Conclusion

 Major economic and social measures have shown that agriculture is the dominant sector in the Ethiopian
economy.
 The adoption of agricultural technologies, especially in subsistence farming, would be governed by a
complex set of factors

 These include economic, climate change, social, institutional factors and delivery mechanism. Age of
potential adopter, social status of farmers, education level and gender-related aspects, household size, and
farming experience, information access, extension services.

 Adoption process is the change that takes place within individual with regards to an innovation from the
moment that they first become aware of the innovation to the final decision to use it or not.
 Information plays a key role in the adoption of agricultural technologies.
 Information about a technology can come from own experience and/ or external sources. Generally to adopt
agricultural technology the technology is less cost, more benefit and adaptable the climate.
 Institutional factors deal with the extent or degree to which institutions impact on technology adoption by
smallholders. Institutions include all the services to agricultural development, such as finance, insurance and
information dissemination.
 Education is thought to create a favorable mental attitude for the acceptance of new practices especially of
information-intensive and management-intensive practices.
 Good extension programs and contacts with producers are a key aspect in technology dissemination and adoption.
 Generally to adopt agricultural technology the technology is less cost, more benefit and adaptable the climate.

9
.

3.2 Recommendation

 As the review shows, one of the major constraints that people not adopt new technology has been identified and
perceived was low community participation on technology adoption by means of different factors.
 In fact, changing the mind and behavior of human being is not an easy task. To bring about behavioral and attitudinal
changes it needs, changing the attitude of people by educating and motivating them is very important.
 Decision makers also need to recognize that technologies that build on assets which the poor farmers already have are
more likely to be adopted. To encourage adoption of new technologies, pro-poor agricultural researchers must look
beyond simply boosting productivity.
 They should emphasize certain variables which reduce the farmers’ vulnerability to loss of income, bad health, natural
disasters, and other factors.
 In addition, an understanding of local cultural practices and preferences is important if smallholder farmers are to
benefit from agricultural technologies developed through research.
 Governmental and non-governmental organization should give awareness about the important of technology.
 Governments of Ethiopia are to promote adoption of agricultural technology, must make appropriate institutional and
credit access for farmers.
 The fundamental objective of extension is to develop the rural people economically, socially and culturally by means of
education. A continuous awareness creation work has to be done through the local leaders of the area.
 The main factors affecting adoption of agriculture technology are economic, social and institutional factors. A lack of
assets, such as land, education or equipment, will limit technology adoption. That means more attention of further
studies and development efforts needs to be paid to technologies that require few assets.
 Generally farmers should have to be participate actively in any governmental program in socially, economically and
also politically.

10
 4. REFERENCE

Arega D. Alene and Manfred Zeller (2005), Technology Adoption and Farmer Efficiency in Multiple Crops Production in
Eastern Ethiopia: Vol. 6, No 1 5.
Ashenafi Gebru (2006), “The Determinants of Modern Agricultural Inputs Adoption and their Productivity in Ethiopia”,
(The Case of Amhara and Tigray Regions).
Cameron, L.A. (2006), “The Importance of Learning in the Adoption of High-Yielding Variety Seeds.” American Journal
of Agricultural Economics.
Caswell, M., K. Fuglie., C. Ingram., S. Jans and C. Kascak (2008). “Adoption of Agricultural Production Practices:
Agriculture Economic Report No. 792. Washington DC
Central Statistical Agency. (2004). Summary and Statistical report of the 2007 Population and Housing Census Results of
Ethiopia. United Nations Population Fund, Addis Ababa.

Debra Rubas (2007),”Technology Adoption: Who is likely to Adopt and how does theTiming affect the Benefits,
“University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Daku, L. (2009), “Assessing farm-level and Aggregate Economic Impacts of Olive Integrated pest Management Programs
in Albania.” PhD. Dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,

Deressa T. (2007),” Measuring the Economic Impact of Climate Change on Ethiopian Agriculture:” Ricardian Approach.
World Bank Policy Research Paper No. 4342. World Bank, Washington DC.
Dessalegn Molla Ketema, (2008) “Social Networks and Diffusion of Agricultural Technology”: the Case of Sorghum in
Metema Woreda, Northern Gonder, Ethiopia,

Ehler, L.E and D.G Bottrell, (2008), “The Illusion of Integrated Pest Management. Issues in Science and Technology.”
Bell and Howell Information and Learning Company.

11
Enos, J.L and W.H Park (2006) “The Adoption of Imported Technology:” The Case of Korea. New York:
Feder, G. and R. Slade (2006), “The Acquisition of Information and Adoption of New Technology,” American Journal of
Agricultural Economics, 66.

Fernandez-Cornejo, J. (2006) “The Microeconomic Impact of IPM Adoption: Theory and Application.”Agricultural and
Resource Economic Review.

IFPRI, (2009),”International Food Policy Research Institute. Pest Management and Food Production:” Looking into the
future, Vol. 20, no. 52.

Jackline Bonabana-Wabbi (2008) “Assessing Factors Affecting Adoption of Agricultural Technologies:” The Case of
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in Kumi District, Eastern Uganda

Journal of Sustainable Development; (2012) “The Impacts of Technology Adoption on Smallholder Agricultural
Productivity in Sub-Saharan Africa:”A Review Published

Karki, L. B. (2004). “Impact of Project Intervention on Rural Households in Nepal: Assessment

Of Socio-Economic and Environmental Implications.” A PhD thesis Submitted to the University
Of Giessen, Institute of Project and Regional Planning, Giessen, Germany.

Khanna, M. (February 2009): “Sequential Adoption of Site-Specific Technologies and its Implications for Nitrogen
Productivity: A Double Selectivity Model.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics.

Kurukulasuriya, P. and R. Mendelsohn (2006) “Crop Selection: Adapting to Climate change in Africa. Centre for
Environmental Economics and Policy in Africa.” Pretoria, South Africa: University of Pretoria. CEEPA Discussion
Paper No. 26.

Nkonya, E., Pender, J. (2004). “Strategies for Sustainable Land Management and Poverty Reduction in Uganda.” Press,
1995.

Temesgen Deressa (2008), “Analysis of perception and Adaptation to Climate Change in the Nile basin of Ethiopia.”

World Bank (2007) - Beating the Odds: Sustaining Inclusion in a Growing Economy.

Zilberman D (2006), “Adoption of Agricultural Innovation in Developing Countries:” A Survey. Economic Development
and Cultural Change 33(2).

12
13