Perception-precision,clarity,compatability,complexitiy all are well defined.

1. Welcome

2. Perception On Information
Management Of Recommended
Sugarcane Cultivation Practices
Among The Growers In
Tiruchirappalli District Of Tamilnadu.
PRESENTED BY
V.MANGAIYARKARASI
REG:NO : 031708

3. ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Chairman;
Dr.V.Balamurugan
Assistant Professor,
Department of Agricultural Extension.
Members:
Dr.J.Meenambigai
Assistant Professor,
Department of Agricultural Extension.
Dr.K.Suseendran
Assistant Professor,
Department of Agronomy.

4. Introduction

5.  The Key to agricultural development lies in
the mind, heart and hands of the farmers.
 It is the motivated technologies which must
release the lock and open the door to
modernization of agricultural industry.
 The single force which accelerates this
process is the effective dissemination of the
adequate agricultural information to the
farmers.
 However efficient the production technology
is, it would be of no use unless it is
communicated effectively to the farmers.

6. Information management
 It is defined as a conscious activity of
extension workers to transmit technology or
message in a precise, clear, complete,
understandable, suitable and adequate
manner to the intended audience to evoke
desired response.

7. Perception on information management
 Perception on information management as a
conscious activity of extension workers to transmit
the technology or message in a precise, clear,
complete and understandable manner to the intended
audience to evoke desired response.
 Accordingly, the information management in this
study was operationalized as the perception of the
farmer respondents on the extent of precision, clarity,
completeness, understandability adequacy and
suitability of the information they received on the
recommended sugarcane technology.

8.  Sugarcane, Saccharum officinarum L. an old energy
source for human beings and, more recently a
replacement of fossil fuel for motor vehicles, was first
grown in South East Asia and Western India.
 Around 327 B.C, it was an important crop in the Indian
sub-continent. It was introduced to Egypt around 647 A.D.
and about one century later to Spain (755 A.D.)
 Since then, the cultivation of sugarcane was extended to
nearly all tropical and sub-tropical regions.
 Portuguese and Spaniards took it to the New World
early in the 16th century. It was introduced to the United
States of America (Louisiana) around 1741.

9. SUGARCANE CULTIVATION IN INDIA
 Brazil is the biggest sugarcane producers in the world.
Brazil ranks first among the sugarcane growing countries
of the world with an area of 9.83 million hectares and
with the production of 739.3 million tonnes per year.
 India is the second largest sugarcane producer in the
world with an area and production of 5.06 million
hectares and 341.2 million tonnes respectively.
 Uttarpradesh has the largest area under sugarcane
cultivation (22.34 lakh tonnes) constituting almost 50% of
the cane area in the country, followed by Maharashtra,
Karnataka, Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Bihar,
Haryana and Punjab. Sugar industry is a major
contributors to the country’s economy offering
employment to 6 million Indians.

10.  In India, the sugar industry is the second largest
agro-based industry next to textiles industry.
 There are 435 sugar mills which utilize around 40-45 %
of the cane and produced 15 million tonnes of sugar.
About 5 lakh workmen are directly employed by the
industry.
 The sugar industry contributes over 1000 crores to
the central exchange as excise duty and taxes
annually. The total value of sugarcane produced in
the country is around 15,000 crores per year.

11. SUGARCANE CULTIVATION IN TAMILNADU
 In Tamilnadu sugarcane is cultivated under the area of
3,13,343 hectare. The major sugarcane cultivating tracts are
Viluppuram, Tiruvannamalai, Cuddalore, Erode, and
Tiruchirappalli districts.The area under sugarcane in the
remaining district of Tamilnadu is comparatively less.
 In Tamilnadu, the area under sugarcane is gradually
declined from 3.13 lakh ha in the year 2013-2014 to 1.83
lakhs ha in the year 2017-2018.The production has also
been considerably declined from 324.54 lakhs tonnes (2013-
2014) to 165.62 lakh tonnes (2017-2018).

12.  Similarly the productivity of sugarcane in the
year 2013-2014 ( 103.6 tonnes /ha ) has also
been decreased to 90.1tonnes /ha during 2017-
2018.
 This is an alaming signal which highlights the
necessity of increasing the area, production
and productivity of sugarcane in the state.
 The farmers are to be motivated to adopt the
recommended sugarcane technologies so as
to increase the production and productivity.

13.  Adoption of any technology depends on the
complete perception of the technological
information in terms of preciseness, clarity,
completeness, understandability, suitability
and adequacy.
 If the farmers could manage the technological
information whatever they have received on
the above dimensions, could able to retain the
information for the longer time without any
distortion.

14.  This would better enable them to adopt all
the technological dimensions of the
technology in an exact way so as to improve
the production levels of the crops.
 By keeping these points into consideration,
the present study was carried out to study the
perception on information management of
sugarcane growers.

15. OBJECTIVES

16. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES
To study the characteristics of selected
sugarcane growers.
To study the perception of sugarcane growers
on information management for recommended
sugarcane technologies.
To study the relationship of characteristics of
the respondents with their perception on
information management.
To study the constraints experienced by the
respondents in perception on information
management.

17. .Conceptual model of the study
 AGE
 EDUCATIONAL STATUS
 OCCUPATIONAL STATUS
 ANNUAL INCOME
 AREA UNDER SUGARCANE
CULTIVTION
 FARMING EXPERIENCE
 EXPERIENCE IN SUGARCANE
CULTIVATION
 SOCIAL PARTICIPATION
 EXTENSION AGENCY
CONTACT
 MASS MEDIA EXPOSURE
 SCIENTIFIC ORIENTATION
 INFORMATION SOURCE
UTILIZATION
 PRECISION
 CLARITY
 COMPLETENESS
 UNDERSTANDABILITY
 ADEQUACY
 SUITABILITY
PERCEPTION
ON
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
CONSTRAINTS

18. Research
Methodology

19. LOCALE OF RESEARCH:
 Tiruchirappalli district of Tamil Nadu state was
selected for the present study due to the following
reasons.
 Sugarcane is cultivated under more area in the
district both as main and ratoon crops.
 A Farm Science Center (Krishi Vigyan Kendra) of
Tamilnadu Agricultural University is Functioning at
Sirugamani of this district.
 Familiarity of the student researcher with the local
language and culture of the people so as to receive
better and valid responses.

20. Selection of Taluk
 Tiruchirappalli district has fourteen
taluks viz.,
Andhanallur,Manikandam,Thiruverumbur,Ma
napparai,marungapuri,Vaiyampati,Musiri,T.p
et,Thottiyam,Thuraiyur,Uppliyapuram,Lalgudi,
Mannachanallur,Pullambadi.Of Which,
Lalgudi taluk was selected as it had the
maximum area under sugarcane cultivation

21. Selection of villages
 Lalgudi block consist of 45 villages.
Among the 45 villages, six villages viz.,
Mettupatti, Peruvalanallur, Komakudi,
Koohur, Thengal and Mullal were selected as
they had maximum area under sugarcane
cultivation.

22. S.No Nameofthe
villages
Totalnumberof
sugarcanegrowers
Numberof farmers
selected
1 Mettupatti 264 27
2 Peruvalanallur 226 23
3 Komakudi 188 19
4 Koohur 183 19
5 Thengal 166 17
6 Mullal 149 15
Total 1176 120
Selection of respondents

23. Study area
Map of the study area

24. STATISTICAL TOOLS USED
 Mean
 Percentage analysis
 Cumulative frequency method
 Zero-order correlation
 Multiple regression analysis

25. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

26. S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Young 30 25.00
2 Medium 52 43.33
3 Old 38 31.67
Total 120 100.00
Characteristics of respondents
1.AGE
Distribution of respondents according to
their age
(n=120)

27. 2.EDUCATIONAL STATUS.
Distribution of respondents according to their level of
educational status (n=120)
S. No Category Number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Illiterate - -
2 Can read only - -
3 Can read and
write only
14 11.67
4 Primary
education
22 18.33
5 Middle school
education
26 21.67
6 High school
education
32 26.67
7 Higher
secondary
education
20 16.66
8 Collegiate 6 5.00
Total 120 100.00

28. 3.OCCUPATIONAL STATUS
Distribution of respondents according to their
occupational status
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Agriculture as
primary
occupation
98 81.67
2 Agriculture as
secondary
occupation
22 18.33
Total 120 100.00
(n=120)

29. 4.ANNUAL INCOME.
Distribution of respondents according to their
level of annual income.
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 36 30.00
2 Medium 64 53.33
3 High 20 16.67
Total 120 100.00
(n=120)

30. 5.AREA UNDER SUGARCANE
CULTIVATION
Distribution of respondents according to their
level of area under sugarcane cultivation..
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Marginal(2.5
acres)
38 31.67
2 Small(2.5-5
acres)
72 60.00
3 Big (above 5
acres)
10 8.33
Total 120 100.00
(n=120)

31. 6.FARMING EXPERIENCE.
Distribution of respondents according to their
level of farming experience.
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 28 23.33
2 Medium 56 46.67
3 High 36 30.00
Total 120 100.00

32. 7.EXPERIENCE IN SUGARCANE
CULTIVATION.
Distribution of respondents according to their
Experience in sugarcane cultivation.
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 24 20.00
2 Medium 60 50.00
3 High 36 30.00
Total 120 100.00

33. 8.SOCIAL PARTICIPATION.
Distribution of respondents according to their
level of social participation.
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 40 33.33
2 Medium 60 50.00
3 High 20 16.67
Total 120 100.00

34. 9.EXTENSION AGENCY CONTACT.
Distribution of respondents according to their
extension agency contact.
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 44 36.67
2 Medium 56 46.67
3 High 20 16.66
Total 120 100.00

35. 10.MASS MEDIA EXPOSURE
Distribution of respondents according to their
level of mass media exposure.
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 26 21.66
2 Medium 60 50.00
3 High 34 28.33
Total 120 100.00

36. 11.SCIENTIFIC ORIENTATION.
Distribution of respondents according to their
level of scientific orientation.
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 26 21.66
2 Medium 60 50.00
3 High 34 28.33
Total 120 100.00

37. 12.INFORMATION SOURCE UTILIZATION
Distribution of respondents according to their
level of information source utilization.
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 25 20.83
2 Medium 59 49.17
3 High 36 30.00
Total 120 100.00

38. OVERALL PERCEPTION ON INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 38 31.67
2 Medium 56 46.67
3 High 26 21.66
Total 120 100.00

39. PERCEPTION ON INFORMATION GIVES FOR RECOMMENDED
SUGARCANE TECHNOLOGIES
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 28 23.30
2 Medium 60 50.00
3 High 32 26.70
Total 120 100.00

40. Practice wise perception on precision of information
S. No Name of the technology Mean Rank
1 Sett selection 1.93 VIII
2 Sett treatment 1.22 X
3 Planting 2.64 I
4 Herbicide application 2.48 II
5 Bio fertilizer application 2.12 VI
6 Phosphatic fertilizer
application
2.36 III
7 Nitrogenous fertilizer
application
1.98 VII
8 Potash fertilizer application 1.66 IX
9 Control for early shoot
borer
2.34 IV
10 Bio control agent for
internode borer
2.17 V
(n=120)

41. Perception on clarity of information gives for recommended
sugarcane technology
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 30 25.00
2 Medium 68 56.70
3 High 22 18.30
Total 120 100.00
(n=120)

42. Practice wise perception on clarity of information
(n=120)
S.
No
Name of the technology Mean Rank
1 Sett selection 1.91 VII
2 Sett treatment 1.47 IX
3 Planting 2.46 V
4 Herbicide application 2.49 IV
5 Bio fertilizer application 2.58 I
6 Phosphatic fertilizer
application
2.54 II
7 Nitrogenous fertilizer
application
1.19 X
8 Potash fertilizer application 1.89 VIII
9 Control for early shoot
borer
2.52 III
10 Bio control agent for
internode borer
2.28 VI

43. Perception on completeness of information
given for recommended sugarcane
technologies.
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 30 25.00
2 Medium 78 65.00
3 High 12 10.00
Total 120 100.00
(n=120)

44. Practice wise perception on completeness of
information (n=120)
S. No Name of the technology Mean Rank
1 Sett selection 2.11 VII
2 Sett treatment 1.56 IX
3 Planting 2.58 V
4 Herbicide application 3.00 IV
5 Bio fertilizer application 2.28 I
6 Phosphatic fertilizer
application
2.15 II
7 Nitrogenous fertilizer
application
1.61 X
8 Potash fertilizer
application
1.77 VIII
9 Control for early shoot
borer
2.59 III
10 Bio control agent for
internode borer
2.55 VI

45. Perception on understandability of information gives for
recommended sugarcane technologies
(n=120)
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 30 25.00
2 Medium 58 48.30
3 High 32 26.70
Total 120 100.00

46. Practice wise perception on understandability of information
for recommended sugarcane technologies
(n=120)
S.
No
Name of the technology Mean Rank
1 Sett selection 2.28 VII
2 Sett treatment 1.98 VIII
3 Planting 2.79 II
4 Herbicide application 3.00 I
5 Bio fertilizer application 2.61 IV
6 Phosphatic fertilizer
application
2.52 V
7 Nitrogenous fertilizer
application
1.93 IX
8 Potash fertilizer
application
1.82 X
9 Control for early shoot
borer
2.69 III
10 Bio control agent for
internode borer
2.47 VI

47. Perception on adequacy of information given for
recommended sugarcane technologies.
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 40 33.33
2 Medium 60 50.00
3 High 20 16.67
Total 120 100.00
(n=120)

48. Practice wise perception on adequacy of information
S.
No
Name of the technology Mean Rank
1 Sett selection 2.43 VI
2 Sett treatment 2.13 VII
3 Planting 2.52 III
4 Herbicide application 3.00 I
5 Bio fertilizer application 2.82 II
6 Phosphatic fertilizer
application
2.49 IV
7 Nitrogenous fertilizer
application
2.21 VII
8 Potash fertilizer
application
1.75 X
9 Control for early shoot
borer
2.01 IX
10 Bio control agent for
internode borer
2.47 V
(n=120)

49. Perception on suitability of information given for
recommended sugarcane technologies.
(n=120)
S. No category number of
respondents
Per cent
1 Low 26 21.67
2 Medium 60 50.00
3 High 34 28.33
Total 120 100.00

50. Practice wise perception on suitability of information
(n=120)
S.
No
Name of the technology Mean Rank
1 Sett selection 2.84 II
2 Sett treatment 2.28 IX
3 Planting 2.47 VI
4 Herbicide application 2.91 I
5 Bio fertilizer application 2.25 IX
6 Phosphatic fertilizer
application
2.70 III
7 Nitrogenous fertilizer
application
2.46 VII
8 Potash fertilizer
application
1.66 X
9 Control for early shoot
borer
2.55 V
10 Bio control agent for
internode borer
2.69 IV

51. Characteristics of respondents with their perception on information management.
S.N0 Variables Regression
co-efficient
Standard error
of regression
co-efficient
“t” Value “r” value
X1 Age 0.241 0.252 -0.956NS -0.052NS
X2 Educational status 0.345 0.150 2.300* 0.225*
X3 Occupational status 0.229 0.451 0.508NS 0.134NS
X4 Annual income 0.203 0.011 1.845NS 0.074NS
X5 Area under sugarcane
cultivation
-0.092 0.355 -0.259NS 0.149NS
X6 Experience in
sugarcane cultivation
0.125 0.060 2.083* 0.216*
X7 Farming experience 0.339 0.180 1.883NS 0.126NS
X8 Social participation -0.238 0.270 -0.881NS 0.237*
X9 Extension agency
contact
0.342 0.141 2.425* 0.199*
X10 Mass media exposure -0.128 0.240 -0.533NS 0.218*
X11 Scientific orientation 0.532 0.240 2.216* 0.264**
X12 Information source
utilization
0.250 0.112 2.232* 0.297**

52. Constraints experienced by the farmers in information management
S.N0 Constraints Number of
respondents
Per cent Rank
1 Lack of involvement of farmers in research
activities.
107 89.16 I
II Limited cotact with researchers and extensionists. 98 81.66 II
3 Lack of adequate time to read newspaper, listen to
radio and view TV Programme.
80 66.66 III
4 Lack of chance to participate in the training
programme.
78 65.00 IV
5 Lack of opportunity to participate in different
extension activities.
70 58.33 V
6 Non availability of information material on
sugarcane technologies
68 56.66 VI
7 Lack of opportunities to participate in farm
broadcast and farm telecast
64 53.33 VII
8 Difficulty in remembering message 62 51.66 VIII
9 Location of research station at distant places 60 50.00 IX
10 Lack of time and mobility problems to meet
scientists and extensionists.
57 47.50 X

53. Empirical model of the study
PERCEPTION ON
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT DIMENSIONS
 Precision
 Clarity
 Completeness
 Understandability
 Suitability
 Adequacy
Perception on
information
management of
sugarcane
growers
CHARACTERISTICS
 Educational status
 Experience in sugarcane
cultivation
 Social participation
 Extension agency contact
 Mass media exposure
 Scientific orientation
 Information source
utilization
CONSTRAINTS
 Lack of involvement of farmers in
research activities.
 Limited contact with researchers and
extensionists.
 Lack of adequate time to read newspaper,
listen to radio and view TV Programme.
 Lack of chance to participate in the the
training programme.

DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
 Imparts special training on information
management.
 Involving farmers in research.
 Supplying printed information material.
 Provide opportunity of the farmers to
participating in media programmes.

54. SUMMARY AND
CONCLUSION

55. Implication of the study:
 The overall perception on information management was
found to be medium among majority of the respondents.
Similarly the perception on precision, clarity,
completeness, understandability, adequacy and
suitability of information was also found to be medium.
 Hence it is recommended to the administrators to bring
out qualitative improvement in the extension
communication by means of information management
technique, since the information management was found
to be a favourable factor for knowledge building and
promotion of extent of adoption. To this, it is suggested
to the extension adminstrators to impart special training
on information management techniques to enable them
to present precise, clear, complete, understandable,
adequate and suitable messages to the farmers.

56.  Audible voice, clear pictures and blown-up photographs,
bold letters, use of objects, sample and specimens are
recommended to make the message clear.
 Collection and use of the locally available objects,
quoting local evidences, giving comprehension
exercises during training, encouraging participation in
sharing of experiences session, conducting field trips,
discussing with scientists, using natural coloured
exhibits and animated models and modern interactive
devices like information kiosks, interactive multimedia
compact disks etc., are suggested to make the message
more understandable. By these methods, the perception
on information management could be effectively
developed.

57.  The variables namely viz., educational status, experience in
sugarcane cultivation, social participation, extension agency
contact, mass media exposure, scientific orientation and
information source utilization were found to have positive and
significant relationship with their perception on information
management. Hence these factors may be taken in to
consideration while formulating training strategies for
perception on information management.
 Lack of involvement in research activities was the constraint
reported by majority of the respondents. It is suggested that
the scientists and technocrats may arrange to involve farmers
in sugarcane research, so as to have participatory research in
turn would results in better adoption of technologies.

58.  Limited contact with researchers and extensionists was
reported as the constraints by majority of the respondents.
It is suggested that the researchers and extensionists may
contact the sugarcane growers more frequently through
personal contact, mobile phones, mails, meetings etc.
 Lack of adequate time to read newspaper, listen to radio
and view T.V programmes was the constraint faced by
majority of the respondents. The farmers may be
encouraged to read newspaper and watch TV programmes
by highlighting the importance of these media.

59.  Lack of opportunity to participate in different extension
activities was the constraint faced by majority of the
respondents. This could be solved by organizing more number
of training programmes on sugarcane cultivation and this may
be given publicity through media.
 Non-availability of information material on sugarcane
technologies was the constraint experienced by most of the
respondents. This could be solved by supplying the printed
information materials like leaflet, folders, pamplets etc., on
sugarcane technologies with complete information to the
farmers.
 Lack of opportunity to participate in farm broadcast and farm
telecast was the constraint experienced by 50.00 per cent of
the respondents. It is suggested that the All India Radio and TV
channels, telecasting farm programmes may organize more
number of programmes and extent opportunities to all the
farmers to participate in such programmes.

60. Suggestion for future research:
 Similar studies on perception on information
management may be taken up in some other district
with some other crops for the purpose of
generalization of findings.
 Studies on various learning experiences of the
clientele may be undertaken.
 The scale may be specially developed to study the
perception of farmers cultivating various crops on
information management.

61. Thank you

62. “No matter, how
much rich you
are, you can’t
live without
water”