| Sumario: | Agricultural extension in developing countries has evolved from the traditional top-down approach to a more demand-driven farmer-centred approach. These changes have also led to improved involvement of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and research institutions. Inadequacies displayed by the public extension in Uganda has led to the emergence of farmer-led extension delivery whose main mandate goes beyond technology transfer but also towards farmer-driven agricultural technologies and enhanced farmer capacities. One such approach is the use of farmer-to-farmer extension that targets farmers as the core instigators of change. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of the volunteer farmer trainer (VFT) approach, a form of farmer-to-farmer extension promoted by the East Africa Dairy Development (EADD) project, in dissemination of livestock feed technologies and practices in comparison to other information sources. This was done through a survey of 11 producer organizations (POs) in Eastern and Central Uganda. The POs represented different feeding systems: intensive, characterized by small land size and few cattle mainly focused on zero grazing; extensive, characterized by free grazing and a larger number of cattle; and semi-intensive which has characteristics of both intensive and extensive feeding systems. In the study sites, most farmers accessed information on livestock feeds from PO extension assistants, followed by radio and VFTs. VFTs were found to be a preferred information source for female farmers both in male-headed and female-headed households. However, male farmers did not consider VFTs among the top three most preferred information sources. Male farmers often accessed information on feed technologies from PO extension assistants and radio, while female farmers accessed information from PO extension assistants and VFTs. Female heads of households accessed information from PO extension assistants followed by radio and VFTs while females in male-headed households accessed information from PO extension assistants followed by VFTs and National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS). Even though farmers interviewed were from POs, not all PO members sought information from PO extension assistants. The farmers interviewed in this study were all members of POs and, therefore, the results could be skewed towards POs extension assistants. In terms of information source preference, POs extension assistants were most preferred, followed by NGOs and NAADS. VFTs came in fourth. When comparing VFTs’ effectiveness and other most preferred information sources, VFTs were ranked second by male and female farmers. Effectiveness was measured with regard to accessibility, affordability, reliability and frequency of contact with farmers. PO extension assistants were ranked first while NAADS and NGOs were ranked third by male and female farmers. x Female farmers, both in male- and female-headed households accessed approximately similar feed technologies from the different sources with the exception of mucuna and setaria species. However, females in male-headed households accessed most feed technologies at a higher rate than female household heads. The most accessed feed technologies by females were Napier grass, sweet potato vines, Rhodes grass, lablab, utilization of crop residues and fodder shrubs. Male farmers, on the other hand, significantly accessed information on water harvesting, paddocking, bush clearing and perimeter fencing at a higher rate than female farmers (p<0.05). With regard to trainings offered to the PO members, the majority of farmers were trained by PO extension assistants (78%), 64% by NGOs and 58.2% by NAADS, while 53.5% received training from VFTs. Most of the trainers, including VFTs, only trained once or twice in a sixmonth period and most farmers (81.2%) often resorted to self-training. More than 50% of farmers were trained on Napier grass, fodder shrubs, silage making, hay making and mineral supplementation. A higher number of female farmers received training than male farmers. Furthermore, female farmers received training on Napier grass, mucuna, fodder shrubs, sweet potato vines, lablab, silage-making, utilization of crop residues and mineral supplementation at a higher rate than male farmers who received training mostly on management of dairy stock, perimeter fencing, bush clearing, weed control and paddocking. There was no significant difference between training received by females in both male- and female-headed households. All farmers practised 3-10 technologies, with most farmers practising an average of eight technologies. The most practised technologies were Napier grass planting, mineral supplementation and utilization of sweet potato vines by 73.3%, 72.6% and 62.1% of farmers respectively. Male-headed households practised more of the feed technologies than femaleheaded households. Females in male-headed households were also found to practise more technologies than female heads. Across feeding systems, farmers in extensive systems practised bush clearing, perimeter fencing, paddocking, water harvesting and the management of dairy stock more than both intensive and semi-intensive systems. In intensive and semi-intensive systems, farmers practised Napier grass planting, utilization of crop residues, planting of fodder shrubs, use of lablab and sweet potato vines. The three most practised and preferred feed technologies were Napier grass, sweet potato vines and mineral supplementation, practised by 66.5%, 36.8% and 31.3% of farmers respectively. In terms of preferences by use of weighted scores, mucuna, Napier/elephant grass and paddocking were ranked first, second and third respectively. Mucuna was however practised by only 16 farmers. Approximately 83.5% of farmers who had received training had trained other farmers. Training shared by farmers was similar to training received and practised. A higher percentage of farmers were trained but this proportion decreased with practice and the sharing of feed technologies. This study found that there is an average 9.9% decrease with farmers trained to farmers who practise, and a further 6.9% decrease with farmers sharing information from those who practise. These findings therefore suggest that the VFT approach is an effective model for the delivery of information, especially to female farmers. The approach is considered less costly, accessible and reliable, and can reach farmers more frequently. Effectiveness of the VFTs can be enhanced by finding low-cost ways of motivating them to perform better.
|
|---|