UTILIZATION OF IMPROVED PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES AMONG SMALL RUMINANT (SHEEP AND GOATS) FARMERS IN SOUTH-EAST, NIGERIA

ABSTRACT

The study was carried out in South east Nigeria. The broad objective was to analyze the utilization of improved small ruminant production technologies among farmers in the study area. A multi-stage, Purposive, Simple random sampling techniques were deployed in sampling 240 respondents and data generated with the aid of a well-structured questionnaire and Focused Group Discussion. Both descriptive and inferential statistics such as Percentages, Mean Score, ANOVA and Ordinary least square regression model were used in analysis. Result showed that the mean age of farmers was 42.4 and majority (99%) kept the animals for Savings. A larger proportion (58.4%) had no contact with extension. The mean flock size of 13.89 for sheep and 7.12 for goats was recorded. Majority (64.8%) used the Semi-Intensive management system, spent a mean amount of N16, 937.00 on feeds and N3,243.00 on medication per month, realizing a mean income of N285,900 per annum from sales. Only hot weather condition with a mean score of 2.87 had a positive effect on small ruminant production. The extent of utilization of the technologies was high with a grand mean of 2.31. However, four out of the twelve technologies studied were infrequently utilized with mean scores below the cut point of 2.05, and they are; periodic deworming, controlled mating, routine vaccination, and animal sanitation. Poor extension services, High Cost of foundation Stock, Difficulty in sourcing feeds, theft of the animals, and High cost of drugs/vaccines with mean scores ranging from 2.1 to 2.6 were severe constraints to small ruminant production. The ANOVA result with an F-value of 2.389 was not statistically significant at P<0.05 and also lower than the tabulated value of F (2.90) implying that respondents did not differ in the use of the technologies. At P<0.05, Cost effectiveness (1.997), Environmental friendliness (2.374), Time saving (-7.984), Simple to practice (-3.405), Similar to local practice (-2.189) and Advantageous to use (-6.679) were significantly related to the use of culling. Cost effectiveness (2.029) was significant and positively related to the use of routine vaccination. Similar to local practice (3.631) and Safe to use (2.210) were significant and positively related to the use of periodic deworming. The study concludes that the frequency of utilization of improved small ruminant production technology is high in eight out of the twelve technologies, but somewhat infrequent in the use of health management related practices. The study recommends more engagement of farmers with targeted livestock extension services to increase awareness and good perception of improved practices, formation of cooperative societies by farmers, and provision of effective, accessible and affordable make-shift veterinary centres across the communities.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF FIGURES

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1       BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Small ruminant (sheep and goats) rearing is a very significant component of livestock production throughout the world and more especially in the developing countries. They are producers of milk, meat, income generators and reservoirs of wealth (Coppock et al., 2006; Andrew and Flintan, 2007; Odeyinka, 2014). Nigeria has population of 73.8 million goats and 42.1 million sheep mainly indigenous breeds and it is reported that current and estimated meat supply does not meet growing demand (Lawal-Adebowale, 2012; NASS, 2011; Ugwu, 2007)). Small ruminants have been seen as the most sustainable, highest-impact livestock in contributing to global food security.

Small ruminant population is concentrated in the North of Nigeria and had a gross production value of US$373.1 and US$73.4 for goats and sheep respectively in 2016 (FAO, 2018). As at 2008, the total numbers of sheep and goat in the world were 861.9 and 1078.2 million, respectively. This implies that there is about one goat to approximately 1.25 sheep in the world (FAOSTAT, 2008). Table 1.1 below shows there are seeming variations across the globe regarding the number of goats, its ratio to sheep and their percentages. Asia has the largest number of goats, followed by Africa, representing about 59.7% and 33.8%, summing up to 93.5% out of the total number of the world, respectively.

Table 1.1: Number of goats and sheep across the globe, ratio of goat to sheep per each and their percentages out of the world total number (FAOSTAT, 2008)

The lowest number of goats is found in Oceania, accounting for 0.1% out of the world total number. The ratio of goat to sheep ranged between 1 goat to 0.8 sheep in the Caribbean to 1 goat to 119.2 sheep in Oceania. The ratios of goat to sheep in Asia, Africa and Central America are approximately equal. This implies that goats are very important in these parts of the world, especially to the poor and landless peasants.

By 2011, the world total of meat production from sheep and goats stood at 13,407.0 tons with a 2.0% annual growth rate from 2000 – 2011. From this figure, 2,758.0 tons, representing 20.57%, came from Africa with annual growth rate of 2.8% within the same period. Out of this tonnage produced from Africa, 463.7 tons came from Nigeria with 3.0 annual growth rate representing 16.81% of the total meat produced from sheep and goats in Africa and 3.46% in the world (FAOSTAT, 2014). This further reflects the emergence of goats and sheep as major livestock to the landless poor in Nigeria and Africa at large.

Goats primarily produce meat, but also provide milk, and their contribution to the nutrition of the rural poor is significant. They supply animal proteins of high biological value in the form of meat, milk, plus essential minerals and fat-borne vitamins to people, pregnant mothers and young children. The small size of goats enables easy slaughter of animals, thereby making readily available sources of fresh meat for immediate consumption (Devendra and Burns, 1983). An increased contribution to animal production from small ruminants is justified by the presence of 94% of the world total numbers of goats and sheep (861.9 and 1078.2 million, respectively). The species found in the developing countries are characterized by inadequate food supply and the need for increased food security for the poor (Devendra and Burns, 1983; FAOSTAT, 2008).

Wilson (1991) also noted that livestock owners in tropical Africa keep a higher proportion of goats compared to sheep because goats are generally more prolific and capable of foraging more widely and on more feed types than sheep. For this reason, goats are easier to manage for people with little experience in animal husbandry/production.

In Nigeria, small ruminants contribute an estimated 35% to the total meat supply, they are more important in the north than in the south, and much more in rural than in urban areas. As reported by Ugwu (2007), there are roughly 1 million head of sheep and 7 million goats in the sub-humid zone of Nigeria. In livestock units, this represents 3% and 16% respectively of total ruminants in the zone and the West African Dwarf breeds of goats are the most populous.

Sheep and Goat production in Nigeria makes a major contribution to the agrarian economy (Tplpgbonse, Iyiola-Tunji, Issa, Jaliya, Daudu, Adedokun and Okoro, 2011). The West African Dwarf sheep and goats are found in the region, south of latitude 140N across West Africa in the coastal area which is humid and favours high prevalence of diseases (Lawal-Adebowale, 2012). This eco-zone is infested with tse-tse flies. However, the West African dwarf breeds thrive well here and reproduce with twins and triplet births (Ugwu, 2007), thereby satisfying a part of the meat requirement in this region. The Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO, 2001) reported that sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America and the near east are the areas mostly affected by low animal protein supply per capital. This could mostly be seen as a result of high dependence on cattle, sheep and goat. The high cost of these animals or their products (meat and milk) makes it practically impossible for the average citizens to afford the right quantity and quality of meat which will increase or measure up the recommended animal protein requirement of 35g for human being (FAO, 2001). In Nigeria and West Africa, sheep and goats are reared traditionally at subsistence level. They are usually left to scavenge and cater for their own nourishment and domestic left-over, which composition depends on the family menu may constitute parts of the goats’ diet (Tologbonse et al, 2011).

According to Odeyinka (2014), Sheep and goats possess adaptive capacities for survival and produce in harsh environments whether arid, high altitude or extremely cold. Other economic advantages as reported by Odeyinka (2014), are initial investment and correspondingly less risk of loss from death. Managerial concerns favour their care by unpaid family labour and lean resource use for the supply of meat and milk in quantities suitable for immediate family consumption.

Moreover, small ruminants are kept for a variety of economic reasons such as Savings and investment, security and insurance, stability and social functions. Sheep and goats have capacity to withstand drought better than cattle, and their short reproductive cycle makes it easy for them to quickly recover from drought or devastating disease infestation. The role of sheep and goats as a regular source of protein during and immediately after a period of drought is one major reason making small ruminants the most important component of livestock particularly in pastoral and agro-pastoral production systems (Wilson, 1991).

Whether farmed in temperate, arid or semi-tropical conditions, small ruminants are known to be efficient forage feed converters. Perhaps, the greatest advantages of small over large ruminant include absence of socio-cultural constraints in its ownership and production system, low investment cost and low capital outlay as well as its importance for meat, milk and fibre supply. Small ruminants tends to be inversely related to size of land-holding, suggesting that small ruminants are of particular importance for landless people. In some cultural settings, ownership of cattle is skewed towards the male folks and women are often marginalized in terms of land ownership. However, such cultural constraints are absent in small ruminant production. This large ruminant production has the capacity to exacerbate gender inequality whereas small ruminant production system eliminates this disparity (Odeyinka, 2014).

It has been argued by some authors that Agricultural growth in Nigeria can be realized through the dissemination of information on improved technologies which are being accumulated through the Research-Extension-Farmer-Input-Linkage-System (REFILS) workshops organized in different agricultural zones in Nigeria (Mgbada, 2006; Nwachukwu, 2014)

Currently, there are many technologies available to Agricultural extension and have been disseminated to sheep and goat farmers in order to encourage production of these species which are common among many rural household in South Eastern Nigeria. They include: improved feeding options, improved husbandry, adequate housing and breeding programmes and without their uptake by farmers, the hope of increasing production of small ruminants may not be realized (ABIAADP resource materials, 2015; Odeyinka, 2006; Gefu, Adu, Alawa and Magaji., 1994).

Effective utilization of agricultural information sources is essential in obtaining information that relates to small ruminant production practices, adopting innovations and other functions. Although a national public agricultural extension system, the ADP, coupled with private extension systems have been developed to ensure that the technologies developed are effectively transferred to farmers (Nwachukwu, 2014). Unfortunately, the level of agricultural production in Nigeria is still low which is an indication that the level of adoption of the innovations developed for farmers has been low (Nwachukwu and Apu, 2008).

Communication is central to agricultural extension service delivery (Nwachukwu, 2014), and effective agricultural communication is the transfer of agricultural technological innovation from technology developers (e.g research institutes, universities, private organisations, etc) through the transfer agencies (e.g ADP) to the technology utilizers (e.g the farmers), in a manner that ensures that what was intended actually got to the farmers. In a broad sense, it entails identifying and utilizing appropriate expertise in the development process which will enhance the participation of intended beneficiaries at the lowest level (Beltran in Nwachukwu, 2017)).

Agricultural messages are indispensable factors in agricultural development as it forms the basis for extension service delivery (Ofuoku, Emah and Itedjere, 2008) and Rogers (2003) described the adoption of a particular technology such as improved small ruminants (sheep and goats) technology, not as the result of a single decision to act, but as a series of actions and thought decisions influenced by the farmers socio-economic and demographic characteristics, message source, communication channels as well as the attributes of the technology as perceived by the farmer. It is expected of public agricultural research organizations to undertake research and development work that will result in increased productivity and sustainability of the agricultural and food sector (Maredia, Byercee and Anderson, 2001).   Agricultural extension and advisory services are required by rural people to enable them adopt improved practices, and by so doing increase their productivity.  The extension agents therefore constitute an important link between agricultural research and technology end users (farmers) (Tokula, Ibeagi, Chinaka and Asumugha, 2008).     Adejoh, Saliu and Ogaji (2006) asserts that, availability of relevant information on new improved farm practices to clients at different locations is a major key to the success of the agricultural sector.

Rogers (2003) describing the innovation-diffusion process of an innovation such as the small ruminants’ production technologies said it is “an uncertainty reduction process”, and  therefore proposed attributes of innovations that help to decrease uncertainty about the innovation. Attributes of innovations includes five characteristics of innovations: (1) relative advantage, (2) compatibility, (3) complexity, (4) trialability, and (5) observability. Rogers (2003) is of the view that “individuals’ perceptions of these characteristics predict the rate of adoption of innovations”. Also, Rogers noted that although there is a lot of diffusion research on the characteristics of the adopter categories, there is dearth of research works on the effects of the perceived characteristics of innovations on the rate of adoption. Okon, Akpabio and Daniel, (2006) posits that the extent at which results of technological innovation are visible makes them more amenable to adoption compared to those not easily observed.  The degree of relative advantage which can also be measured in terms of social benefits and often expressed in economic profitability also determines the level of adoption of new technologies.

Giroh, Abubakar, Balogun, Wuranti and Oghebor (2005) noted a gap between awareness of improved technologies and their subsequent adoption and this Nwachukwu (2017) attributed to a problem existing between informative communication and organized publicity and also noted that communication aims at achieving a desired behavioural change among the farmers (Nwachukwu, 2013), hence the need to consider the attitude of farmers towards new innovations in technology transfer process. Attitude involves the feelings, thought and overt action towards the innovation (Eluwa, 2014)

1.2       STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

According to FAO (2014), by 2050 the world will need to feed an additional 2 billion people and require 70 per cent more meat and milk. In the rural communities of South-East Nigeria, livestock produced include goat, sheep, pigs, poultry and fish. Production of small ruminants especially sheep and goats among rural households in the region is not just for meeting the protein needs of the family but is also an income earner and also has some prestige attached to it. Sheep and goats among households in South-East Nigeria also have some cultural values.

Mostly among the rural poor, majorly the landless, ownership of sheep and goat provides a succor and aids survival as food and cash income; the latter also enables diversification of incomes. Devendra et al. (1983) noted that despite these great importance of these small ruminants among rural households and in national development, there seems to be a decline in their production owing to inability of farmers to use research results and improved technologies in Asia and Africa.

Other issues contributing to the decline in their production include, high prevalence of uncontrolled pest and diseases, poor management of weather conditions, poor sanitary conditions, use of unimproved stock, and poor housing among others. Devendra et al. (1983) recommends a step up in the utilization of research results and improved technologies as important approaches to overcoming existing constraints in goat production.

Agricultural communication is the effective transfer of agricultural technologies to farmers (Nwachukwu, 2017). It serves as an essential component needed for effective utilization of technologies that are designed to boost agricultural production (Eluwa, 2014). However, for farmers to benefit from such technologies, they must first have access to information on the technology (Ani and Baba, 2009). It has been reported that the main problem of agriculture is not that of lack of technologies and scientific findings needed for economic and social change, but properly communicating improved technologies available to farmers especially the rural farmers through agricultural information sources and their adoption of the technologies (Nwachukwu, 2014; Mgbada, 2006; Omokhaye, 2000).

Furthermore, Meyer (2005) observed that inaccessibility to information on improved technologies was responsible for lack of awareness among farmers, which in turn contributed to farmers’ low level of adoption of agricultural-production technology. Also, numerous scientific investigations revealed that effective transfer of technology to farmers is compounded by poor communication management within the extension mainframe, barriers of illiteracy, tradition and credibility of information sources as perceived by farmers (Kotile and Martin, 2000; Vergott, Israel and Mayo, 2005; Ganesh, 2007 and Oladoja, Adeokun and Fapojuwo, 2008). All these have contributed to poor exposure of farmers to appropriate agricultural technologies which has resulted to one of the major reasons for low yield recorded by many Nigerian farmers (Eluwa, 2014).

For effective dissemination of technology, Information and communication that are designed to boost agricultural production are essential ingredients (Ozowa, 2004). A lot of important results have been generated from agricultural research Institutes in Nigeria; But, most of these innovations do not get to the farmers. This created a big gap between research outcomes and the use of technologies generated through research efforts (Nwachukwu, 2014).

Disseminating information on improved agricultural technologies, takes place predominantly in the rural areas and inappropriate communication strategies have often been used in attempting to reach the farmers which has resulted in low level of awareness, knowledge and utilization of such technologies among farmers (Nwachukwu, 2013). Dauda (2009) and Nwachukwu (2013) have noted that communication strategies used in disseminating improved technologies among farmers should have characteristics that expresses socio­cultural, religious, moral and emotional needs of the people.

Gefu et al (1994) observed in a study carried out in one of the South-Eastern States of Nigeria that most rural farm households keep more goats than sheep. The average flock size per household was 2.4 and 6.2 sheep and goats. They noted that the observed higher goat flock size may be associated with preference for chevon over that of mutton. Goats are also preferred as "Sacrificial animals in observance of traditional rites and festivals. Moreover, the goat is generally acclaimed to be more hardy and resistant to environmental stress than the sheep and this they noted may have influenced the keeping of more goats than sheep in the area of study. Gefu et al, (1994) noting that the South-Eastern region has potentials for the improvement of goat production but observed low level of awareness and knowledge of technologies transferred as possible hindrances to goat production in South-East Nigeria.

In the South-Western Nigeria, unlike the South-Eastern region, reasonable efforts have been made to improve the production capacity of small ruminant farmers. This includes a project “Management of the West African Dwarf goat in the Humid Tropics” of the Obafemi Awolowo University between 1981 and 1993. With the cooperation of the International Livestock Centre for Africa (ILCA), they developed a package that was simple, adaptable and based on locally available materials for small ruminant production which was also expected to have diffused to other farmers in the Southern and Eastern regions of Nigeria (Odeyinka and Torimiro, 2006).

As reported by Gefu et al (1994), the International Livestock Centre for Africa’s (ILCA) village surveys in southeast Nigeria indicated that up to 75% of the population in some villages may own these animals, making sheep and goat potential contributors in improving the animal protein intake of Nigerians which is known to be far short of the recommended minimum level of 65.0 gm per caput per day, it is not known whether the record still remains same in the zone today. Currently, there is dearth of information on whether there has been a decline or improvement in sheep and goat production in the region and the possible reasons for such. It is not known whether research results to increase small ruminant production disseminated to farmers in South-Eastern Nigeria have been adopted as against their indigenous practices.

From the socio-economic perspective, small ruminant production is a source of invest­ment and instrument against disaster (Odeyinka, 2014). Small ruminants are used in ceremonial feasting and payment of so­cial dues. In the religious circle, sheep are used by Muslims to fulfill religious obliga­tion and goats as a source of protein. Ugwu (2007) posited that small ruminants play an important role in the economic life of the small holder farmers, converting low cost inputs to high value products (meat, milk and skin). As opined by Asiabaka (2002), a number of factors positively or negatively affect adoption of innovations. They either relate to the innovations, or change agency or the social system, and they have implications for the activities of the agricultural extension agency charged with the responsibility of disseminating agricultural innovations to small ruminant farmers. Attributes of innovations includes five characteristics of innovations: (1) relative advantage, (2) compatibility, (3) complexity, (4) trialability, and (5) observability. Rogers (2003) stated that “individuals’ perceptions of these characteristics predict the rate of adoption of innovations”. Rogers (2003) noted that although there is a lot of diffusion research on the characteristics of the adopter categories, there is a lack of research on the effects of the perceived characteristics of innovations on the rate of adoption, hence this study.

Certain improved technologies have been disseminated to farmers in the study area (Gefu, et al., 1994; Odeyinka, 2006; ABIAADP resource materials, 2015). They include;

1.     Adequate housing ( Provision of shades, sleeping platform, provision of heat by lightening)

2.     housing sanitation (practice of cleaning pens and holding areas of animals at least twice a week)

3.     Feeding sanitation (The practice of cleaning feeding and drinking troughs at least twice weekly)

4.      provision of cold clean drinking water

5.     Salt lick for sheep

6.     controlled mating,

7.     fattening (A feeding programme where forage is supplemented to promote growth rate),

8.     Supplementary feeding for adequate nutrient (use of spent maize, kitchen waste, root and other cereals by-product)

9.     Culling to remove unproductive females and slow growing animals,

10.  routine vaccination against peste de petits ruminants (PPR), diarrhoea etc,

11.  Periodic deworming.

12.  Animal sanitation (Animal sanitation involves washing animals periodically to control ectoparasites like ticks, mites, lice and fleas); among others.

It is therefore, imperative to find out the extent to which farmers are aware and utilize improved small ruminants production technologies in the area of study. This is with a view to ascertaining farmers’ prospects and challenges with these innovations. It is also essential to provide appropriate feedback to the research subsystem.

This study therefore, was designed to assess Farmers’ Utilization of improved small ruminant (sheep and goats) production technologies in the study area.

1.3       RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The following research questions are necessary to guide this study

      i.         What are the personal and household characteristics of the respondents?

     ii.         Are the farmers’ aware of the improved small ruminant production practices/technologies?

   iii.         What are the socio-cultural factors associated with the use of small ruminant production technologies?

   iv.         What are the economic factors associated with the use of small ruminant production technologies.

     v.         Are there environmental factors associated with the use of small ruminant production technologies?

   vi.         What are the farmers’ perception of the attributes of improved small ruminant production technologies?

  vii.         To what extent do the farmers use improved small ruminant production technologies?

viii.         What are the constraints associated with the use of small ruminant production technologies in the study area?

1.4       OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The broad objective of this study is to investigate the Utilization of improved technologies among small ruminants (sheep and goat) farmers in South-Eastern Nigeria.

The specific objectives include to;

      i.         describe the personal and household characteristics of the respondents,

     ii.         ascertain farmers’ awareness of the improved small ruminant production practices/technologies,

   iii.         ascertain the socio-cultural factors associated with the use of improved small ruminant production Technologies,

   iv.         determine the economic factors associated with the use of improved technologies in small ruminant production,

     v.         determine the environmental factors associated with utilization of small ruminant production technologies,

   vi.         examine farmers’ perception of the attributes of improved small ruminant production technologies,

  vii.         ascertain the extent of use of improved small ruminant production technologies, and;

viii.         ascertain the constraints to use of improved production technologies among the farmers.

1.5       HYPOTHESES

H₀₁ There is no significant difference in the extent of use of improved small ruminant production technologies across the States of Abia, Imo and Ebonyi.

Ho₂ There is no significant relationship between selected environmental factors and the extent of use of improved small ruminant production technologies.

Ho₃ There is no significant relationship between selected Economic factors and the extent of use of improved small ruminant production technologies.

Ho₄, There is no significant relationship between perceived attributes of the technologies and the extent of use of improved small ruminant production technologies.

1.6       SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

West African Dwarf is the predominant breed of sheep and goats kept in the study area and are ubiquitous especially in the rural areas; and, because they are trypanotolerant their population outnumber cattle and, therefore, occupy roles of importance in terms of total livestock units in South-East Nigeria (Gefu, et al. 1994). As reported by Ugwu (2007), small ruminant production was a part-time activity to realize cash for school fees, hospital bills, women’s group uniform in most rural households in Southeastern Nigeria. Small ruminants like goat contribute immensely to the farming system and the general economy as source of cash, meat and milk supply, provision of quality leather, as well as for sacrifices and ceremonies, among others notwithstanding, constraints to Indigenous small ruminant production in Nigeria has been linked to low level of awareness of improved practices among farmers (Ugwu, 2007; Gefu et al, 1994).

Doss (2004) posits that literature on technology adoption is currently moving in three directions. These include 1) innovative econometric and modeling methodologies to understand adoption decisions, 2) examinations of the process of learning and social networks in adoption decisions and 3) micro-level studies based on local data collection intended to shed light on adoption decisions in particular contexts for policy purposes.

An adoption study like this is based on a desire to gather basic information about the use of improved technologies for small ruminant production and to identify constraints to technology adoption. Information generated from this study will be of importance for policy making and as a micro survey can provide such information, often at lower expense than full-fledged agricultural censuses.

In addition to generating descriptive data about small ruminant technology diffusion, it will also provide useful background information about the farmers who are currently using the technologies and those who are not in the study area. For example, relatively little is known at present about the farmers who use improved small ruminant production technologies in Nigeria. Most national governments in the region do not systematically collect or report such data, in contrast to some other parts of the world. Without basic descriptive information on who is using the technologies and who is not, it is difficult to know how to formulate policies aimed at improving agricultural productivity.

This study further contributes to the body of knowledge as it seeks to provide information on the current status of Indigenous small ruminant production in southeastern Nigeria as well as the factors associated with the adoption of small ruminant technologies among farmers in the area.

The findings from this study will provide available materials for other researchers interested in sheep and goat production in the area as well as provide a background for quality policy formulation in boosting meat production among rural households in South East, Nigeria.

It will serve as a guide for Research and Extension in identifying gaps to be filled in providing technologies, extension and advisory services for small ruminant farmers in the zone that will encourage increased meat production to address the protein need of the rural poor and the nation at large.

The southeastern zone of Nigeria is not known for high production of livestock as against the situation in the north, although many households find it more convenient to keep small ruminants (sheep and goat) because of the ease in management when compared to poultry and large ruminants.  Small ruminants also serves varying purposes to many farm households in the zone hence the need to study the adoption of production technologies aimed at encouraging increased production of small ruminants in the zone (Tologbonse et al. 2011). The productivity of smallholder small ruminant farmers and their contribution to food security and poverty reduction could be influenced by their use of recommended production technologies.

1.7       DEFINITION OF TERMS

The following terms defined in this section are as to be used by the researcher in this study.

Adoption/Utilization: It is a decision involving farmers’ critical evaluations of available options for a technology in relation to their needs, availability of resources and opportunities.

Small ruminants: Generally, the term ‘small ruminants’ in this study applies to sheep and goats and their exotic relatives (of the genus Ovis and Capra).

Small ruminant farmers: For the purpose of this study, small ruminant farmers shall be considered as smallholder farmers with more than one small ruminant.

Effectiveness of information sources: This is used in this study to measure the respondent’s assessment of the effectiveness of the various sources of information for small ruminant production technologies, for the purpose of analysis it shall be treated as not effective (1) moderately effective (2) effective (3) very effective (4), most effective (5)

Flock/Herd Size: This is the total number of small ruminants owned by a small ruminant farmer as at the time of this study.

Technology attributes: Perception: this measures an individual’s view of an item. This shall be operationalized in studying respondents’ perception of the attributes of improved small ruminant production technologies.

Buyers has the right to create dispute within seven (7) days of purchase for 100% refund request when you experience issue with the file received. 

Dispute can only be created when you receive a corrupt file, a wrong file or irregularities in the table of contents and content of the file you received. 

ProjectShelve.com shall either provide the appropriate file within 48hrs or send refund excluding your bank transaction charges. Term and Conditions are applied.

Buyers are expected to confirm that the material you are paying for is available on our website ProjectShelve.com and you have selected the right material, you have also gone through the preliminary pages and it interests you before payment. DO NOT MAKE BANK PAYMENT IF YOUR TOPIC IS NOT ON THE WEBSITE.

In case of payment for a material not available on ProjectShelve.com, the management of ProjectShelve.com has the right to keep your money until you send a topic that is available on our website within 48 hours.

You cannot change topic after receiving material of the topic you ordered and paid for.