الفهرس 
الباب الاوليوجد فقط 14 صفحة متاحة للعرض العام
 |  | from | 295 |  |  |
| | | from | 295 | | |
المستخلص
Adoption Of Agricultural Technology In Agric.
Mechanization Field At Qualubia Governorate
Summary
Development is considered the main concern of all those
working in human societies. They agreed that development can
be realized in their developing countries through programs that
include using new technology and utilizing the technological
development that the world witnessed lately. Development in
agriculture might be achieved by applying suitable technology
recommended by an effective research system capable of
producing such technology and test it to be compatible with
farmers situation, as well as an efficient and sufficient extension
system that has strong linkages with both research and farmers.
Agriculture extension has an effective and important role
in the diffusion and adoption of agriculture machinery.
Extension can reach early adopters, conduct demonstration in
their fields, recommend the type of machines needed, using these
machines through extension meetings farmers problems of using
these new advantage in reflecting farmers problems of using
these new machines.
Diffusion and adoption of agricultural machines,
extension should focus on general and specific extension
programs that is based on the needs and interests of target
farmers. Extension should deal with the barriers limiting this
diffusion and adoption.
Hence, this study was conducted to investigate the level
of farmers’ adoption of agricultural machinery as well as
examining some variables affecting and limiting their adoption
level.
The study aimed to :
1. Identify farmers adoption behaviour of land preparation
machines, seeds cultivation machines, growing crop
machines, and harvest machines technologies, through:
• the year the responded heared about the technology
first time to apply technology
needed period to adopt the technology
unintentional stop of applying the technology
willingness to continue of applying the technology
level of adopting the technology
2. Determin the farmers total adoption level for each of land
preparation machines, seeds cultivation machines,
growing crop machines, and harvest machines
technologies
3. Define differences between farmers, adoption degree of
land preparation machines, seeds cultivation machines,
growing crop machines, and harvest machines
technologies.
4. Define the relationship between farmers’ adoption degree
of the studied technologies and some personal, social,
economic, and communicational dependant variable
studied.
5. Define contribution ratio of the positively correlated
variables with the farmers’ total adoption degree of the
studied technologies in explaining the total variance.
6. Identify the reasons behind farmers reluctance using the
four studied technologies.
The study was conducted in 3 districts of Qalubia
governorate (Benha, Toukh and Qalube). One village from each
district was selected, and a random sample of these villages was
drown using cries & Morgan eqnosion. The sample rated to 7.04
& of land holdings in each village. The sample composed of 176
farmers from Marsafa village (49%), 86 farmers Qaha village
(24%), and 95 farmers from Sedion village (26%) which makes
the total sample amounts to 357 farmers. Data were collected by
personal interview using a pre- tested questionnaire during the
first quarter of 2005. Data were tabulated, coded and
computerized. Frequency and percentages tables were used to
present descriptive data, weighted means, fredman test,
Wilcoxon’s test, Pearsons’ product moment, Multiple
Regression, and step wise to analyse data statistically.
The main results of the study revealed that:
1. Farmer’s adoption behaviour for the studied 4 machinery
technology was reflected through the following 6 aspects: the
year when the respondent heared about the technology, the
year the respond and applied the technology for the first time,
time period needed for adoption, un- inertial stop applying
the technology, willingness to continue adoption, and
adoption level for each technology studied. The study
revealed that farmers behaviour varied as follows:
a) land preparation machinery : The highest rate of farmers
heared about this technology was detected between 1984-
89 by 72% of respondents, as it was applied by 54.9% of
them as early adopters. Time lag of adoption was wide in
1984 and diminished gradually until 1990 as it reached
zero when all respondents adopted the technology in
2002. although all respondents expressed their willing to
continue their adoption, 2.5-0.3% of them stopped the
adoption un-intentially. The farmers in the high adoption
level rated to 77.6%, while the rate reached 11.5% and
10.9% in the medium and low adoption level sequentially.
b) The highest rate of farmers heared about this technology
occurred between 1984-89 by 50.5% of the respondents,
as it was applied by 25.4% of them for the first time.
Time lag of adoption was steady between 1998-2002 as
hearing rate was increased in the same rate of adoption
rate.
c) The highest rate of farmers heared about this tech
occurred between 1984-89 by 44.5% of the respondents,
as it was applied by 31.1 % for the first time, time lag
between hearing about and adopting the tech was wide in
1989 and diminished gradually from 1999 until 2002.
d) The highest rate of farmers heared about this tech
occurred between 1984-89 by 43.7% of the respondents,
as it was applied by 25.5% of total respondents for the
first time. Time lag between hearing and adopting was
rather wide in 1989 and diminished gradually from 1999
until it reached the minimum in 2001 and continued in
2002.
2. Farmers adoption level of the studied technologies: 33.6% of
the total respondents were in the high adoption level, while
34.5% and 31.9% of respondents were in the medium and
low adoption level for all studied technologies.
3. Differences between farmers’ adoption degree of the four
studied machinery innovative technology :
the rnean degree of farmer’s adoption for the four
technologies ranged between 35.51 degree and 14.02 degree.
Ranged means varied also and ranged between 3.71 degree
and 1.93 degree. There was significant differences between
respondents degree of those couples of innovative
technologies:
a. Technology of land preparation machines - technology
seeds cultivation machines.
b. Technology of land preparation machines -Technology
growing crop machines.
c. Technology of land preparation machines -Technology
harvest machines.
d. technology seeds cultivation machines -Technology
growing crop machines.
e. Technology growing crop machines -Technology harvest
machines.
No significant difference was
technology seeds cultivation machines -
machines.
detected between
Technology harvest
4. Correlation between the farmers total adoption degree of the
four studied machinery innovative technologies and some
independan variables:
farmer’s total adoption degree of the studied technologies
wos correlated positively and significantly of 0.0 I with and
each of innovation characteristics availability, farmers
knowledge degree about economic liberalization policy, and
knowledge degree about the effect of economic liberalization
policy on the agricultural activities, and at 0.05 with each of:
availability of machinery innovative technology, availability
of some market information from farmers’ point of view, and
the degree of cultural openness. While this relationship was
negative and significant at 0.05 level with the degree of
benefiting from rural organizations’ services.
5. Contribution rates of significantly correlated variables with
the total adoption degree for the studied technologies in
explaining the total variance.
The multiple regression between the significantly
correlated variables with the total adoption degree of the
studied technologies revealed that only the innovation
characteristics availability degree, and the knowledge degree
of the effect of economic liberalization on agricultural
activities were contributing in explaining the total variance of
farmers adoption of the four studied technologies. The
contribution of both variables rate to 7.3%, as 3.4% of this
was contributed by the innovation characteristics availability
degree, while 3.9% was made by the knowledge degree of
the effect of economic liberalization on the agricultural
activities.
6. Reasons behind farmers reluctance using the studied
technologies farmers mentioned five reasons causing their
reluctance that were: small farm area, narrow roads to the
farm, far distance from the machinery places, unavailability
of the machine, and high rental of the machine.
Applicable benefits:
1. All aspects of the technology should be presented to
farmers as one package to maximize the technology use in
increasing yield per feddan and get the highest quality
2. Integrate various efforts by different organizations to
overcome the reasons behind farmers’ reluctance to adopt
using it.
3. A necessity to increase extension effort in programs
diffusing the technologies of new machines like
technology of seeds cultivating machine, and the
technology of a service machines is the growing yield,
and the technology of the harvest machines.
4. A necessity for the planners and the outlets of extension
programs in the central administration of the agricultural
extension to plan for the reducing of the periods between
the diffution and the adoption of the technology of the
new machines specially which the study prooved they are
still in need for diffusion effarts like seeds cultivation
machines, and the harvest machines technology, this can
SUMMARY
accur saving information by means of composed the
conferences, seminars, ampllcts, and symposiums
5 A necessity for the extension and workers in the
mechanization research institute to infrom farmers about
how to use technologies of seeds cultivating machines the
service machines technologies, harvest machines
technologies and attempt to change theie attitudes toword
these technologies through extension programs which
help in forming farmars in saving seeds, resistinge herbs
and pests reduving the blights and the loose in the yield,
getting clean yield, speed of earth cleaning the land for
following yield, which risen the level of adoption.
6. A necessity that planners and the outlets of the future
extension programsto give great importance to the
following: innovation characteristics availblity, the effect
economic liberization policy on the agricultural the
activities bccouse they have good effect on the rate of
diffusion and adoption of new machines technologies.
7. Future researches in field adoption and diffusion of
machinery technologies must study of ther variables
which may have sinifical contribution in explaining the
degree of machinery technologies adoption in the study
zone and in same ather similarity r zones.
8. gavernamental agriculturel extension must have an
imporant role in the feld of the diffusion and adoption of
the previous technologies by using ampllcts, conferences,
seminars, ampllcts, and symposiums