Determinants of adoption of sustainable agricultural practices among maize producers in Northern Uganda

Figures & data

Figure 1. Conceptual framework.

Figure 2. Study area.

Table 1. Sampling frame

Villages	Sampled farmers
Laroh	25
Pece	25
Bobi	25
Awach	26

Table 2. Independent variables

Independent variable	Measurement	Description
Maize yield	Kilograms	Farmers who report high yield are encouraged to adopt SAPs more than their fellows with low yield
Gender	1—Male, 0—Otherwise	Male farmers adopt the SAPs easily than their female counterparts
Household size	Number	Large households focus on food purchase hence low adoption rate than small households
Farm size	Acres	Farm size increases the adoption rate due to the commercialization
Access to credit	1—Has access, 0—Otherwise	Credit helps in purchasing fertilizers, pesticides which increases the adoption rate
Access to extension	1—Has access, 0—Otherwise	Farmers with access to extension adopt the SAPs easily than their counterparts.
Access to market info	1—Access, 0—Otherwise	Farmers who have access to market information adopt SAPs easily than their counterparts
Group membership	1—Member, 0—Otherwise	Group members share ideas on adoption of SAPs, hence increases the adoption rate
Education level	1—Secondary, 0—Otherwise 1—Tertiary, 0—Otherwise	Highly educated farmers adopt SAPs more than farmers with low education levels.
ICT use Market distance Farm income	1—Yes, 0—Otherwise Kilometers Ugandan Shillings	Farmers who use ICT access adoption information easily, hence higher adoption rate. Farmers located near the trading areas have higher chances of adopting SAPs Farm income increases adoption of SAPs

Table 3. Socio-demographic characteristics of the farmers

Variables	Mean	Standard deviation	Min	Max
Continuous variables
Age	40.25	10.95	22	58
Education	7.30	3.35	5	12
Household size	5.84	3.50	1	10
Market distance	3.89	1.76	0.25	10
Experience	13.09	10.25	1	25
Farm size	5.32	2.05	0.25	10
Dummy variables
Male	0.54	0.25	0	1
Credit access	0.60	0.15	0	1
Extension access	0.88	0.34	0	1
Group member	0.70	0.45	0	1
Access to market information ICT use in farming Non-farm income	0.95 0.64 0.62	0.32 0.48 0.48	0 0 0	1 1 1

Table 4. SAPs and their adoption frequency

SAPs practices	Frequency (F)	Percentage (%)	Major reasons for adoption
Hybrid seeds	68	67.33	Improve farm yield
Recommended spacing	76	75.25	Improves crop productivity
Pesticides	48	47.25	Destroy pests infestation
Inorganic fertilizers	45	44.55	Increase soil fertility
Cover crops	25	24.75	Prevent run off while preserving the soil
Mulching	56	55.44	Retains soils moisture
Crop rotation	54	53.46	Prevents pests build up
Post-Harvest handling	23	22.77	Reduces Post-Harvest Losses

Table 5. Adoption intensity of SAPs

Intensity range (0–1)	Frequency (N)	Percentage (%)	Cumulative frequency
<0.50	23	22.77	22.77
0.50–0.60 0.61–0.70 0.71–0.80	25 20 5	24.75 19.80 4.95	47.52 67.32 72.27
0.81–0.90	7	6.93	79.20
>0.91	21	20.80	100.00
Mean adoption intensity	0.70
Min	0
Max	1

Table 6. VIF and other pre-estimation test results

Explanatory variables	VIF	1/VIF
Education (Secondary)	1.08	0.927
Education (Tertiary)	1.29	0.773
Household size	1.09	0.918
Farm size	1.36	0.735
ICT use	1.08	0.921
Market info access	1.27	0.787
Group membership	1.72	0.581
Extension visits	1.60	0.623
Credit	1.61	0.620
Maize harvest	1.07	0.936
Mean VIF	1.32
Other tests
OV test Prob > F	0.7868
Cook-Weisberg test Prob > F	0.3343

Table 7. Determinants of adoption of SAPs

Explanatory variables	Coefficients	Standard errors	P-value	Conditional marginal effects
Education (Secondary)	−0.032	0.103	0.756	−0.032
Education (Tertiary)	0.238	0.108	0.031**	0.222**
Household size	−0.180	0.082	0.032**	−0.167**
Farm size	0.191	0.069	0.007***	0.178***
ICT use	0.179	0.080	0.028**	0.167**
Market info access	0.278	0.105	0.010***	0.259***
Group membership	0.080	0.087	0.358	0.074
Extension visits	0.272	0.116	0.021**	0.253**
Credit	0.182	0.112	0.100*	0.170*
Maize harvest	0.025	0.029	0.382	0.023
Constant	−1.108	0.316	0.000***	-
Model fit
Prob>F	0.000
Pseudo R^2	0.34
Observations	101
Significance levels	*,**,*** signifies significance at 10, 5 and 1% respectively