|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home | Instructions to Authors |SASE| Editorial Board | Articles | Subscriptions | Conference | Conference Program |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract Jolly, C.M., A. Binns, D. The United
States Agency for International Development (USAID) funded a soil
conservation project “Productive Land Use Systems Project” (PLUS)
and directed by the Pan American Development Foundation (PADF). The project
was named PADF/PLUS and hoping that all farmers in the project area would
embrace the project with open arms. A number of farmers failed to participate
in the project in spite of technical assistance and subsidies that
accompanied project participation. Hence we wanted to find out the underlying
reasons that hindered farmers’ participation in the project. A total of 617 non-adopters of soil
conservation from 113 locations were interviewed in August and September
1998. Their ages ranged from 17 to 90
years. Most of the group, 84% males
and 16% females, had some knowledge and previous exposure to soil conservation
(SC) practices and techniques, and 48% of them had actually used SC techniques
at some time. Approximately 37% of the
non-adopters had no formal educational training, while the remainder had
acquired various levels of formal training, from infant to secondary school
level. The most frequently cited
benefits of SC to non-adopters were that SC “kept the soil fresh”
(which is an indication of the soil fertility status) and reduced rainfall
erosion. The main disadvantages were
cited as “seeds from the hedgerows spoil the soil”
and”decrease in area of land for farming.” The most common SC techniques used by these
farmers were the “straw contour” and the
“rock-wall.” These and
other techniques have been installed on non-adopters’ farms since the
1940s. However, installation seemed to
peak in the 1980s and 1990s, though the individuals operating these farms
were classified as “non-adopters.” Seventy-six percent of all non-adopters did
not practice SC for several reasons, the main ones being “lack of
assistance” and “negligence” on their part. To minimize rainfall erosion on their
farms, 59% of the group used straw contours and planted trees, while 40% did
nothing. Ninety-one percent of the
interviewees were aware of the PADF/PLUS project, and 21% of them cited
“protection of the environment” as its most important
benefit. The main disadvantage of the
project was listed as “lack of information” by 23% of the group,
while “insufficient information about the project” and
“project does not meet our needs” were given as the main reasons
for non-participation in the project.
Finally, 23% of all non-adopters expressed the desire to be affiliated
with another project sometime in the future.
|
|
Copyright ©
2002-2009 |