ABSTRACT
Ecological intensification is being promoted to address food security and environmental challenges. It has shown the potential to improve yields as well as adapt and mitigate the effects of climate variability and change. Despite the great potential, smallholder farmers continue to shun the latter. Apart from this, limited research has been conducted focussing on their acceptance and use in smallholder sub-Saharan African agricultural systems. In this study, a qualitative approach using the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) four constructs (performance, ease of use, social influence and enablers) was used to assess behavioral intention to accept and use ecological intensification options. A total of 97 smallholder farmers from diverse farm types in rural Limpopo and Eastern Cape, South Africa participated in focus group discussions to assess behavioral intention to accept and use ecological intensification options. Smallholder farmers revealed that they were exposed to a plethora of ecological intensification options. However, acceptance and utilization of these options were low, mainly due to lack of awareness, germplasm, and technical support. The four constructs of the UTAUT framework revealed locally relevant knowledge that must be considered for effective acceptance and use of ecological intensification options.
Abbreviations: ACCESS: Alliance for Collaboration for Climate and Earth System Sciences; ADCI: African Climate Development Initiative; NRF: National Research Foundation; SSA: Sub Saharan Africa; UTAUT: Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology; WRC: Water Research Commission; FAO: Food and Agriculture Organisation; CA: Conservation Agriculture
Acknowledgments
The authors are very grateful to Alliance for Collaboration for Climate and Earth System Sciences (ACCESS), South African Water Research Commission (WRC), African Climate Development Initiative (ACDI) and Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) (grant code: NE/N014472/1) for funding the work. The authors are indebted to the Department of Rural Development and Agrarian Reform (DRDAR), in the Eastern Cape province and Limpopo Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (LDARD), Risk and Vulnerability Science Centre within the Faculty of Science and Agriculture, at the University of Fort Hare and Institute for Rural Development (IRD), at the University of Venda for providing both technical and logistical support.
Authors contributions
Farirai Rusere and Siyabusa Mkuhlani developed the first draft of the manuscript, including literature search and colloation, data collection, and analysis. Olivier Crespo, Lynn Dicks, Joseph Francis, and Leocadia Zhou supervised the research. They provided guidance in terms of the article structure and directed the retrieval of relevant literature and finalization of the manuscript, including reviewing successive drafts.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships which may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
Prior informed consent was sought from each interviewee respondent.