Thank you for the feedback. Addressing those additional questions could help provide a more comprehensive understanding of the topic.

1. Findings from the Knowledge, Attitude,
Perception (KAP) Analysis
Clare Narrod, on behalf of the team
IFPRI: M. Tiongco, R. Scott, and W. Collier
CIMMYT: H. De Groote , J. Hellin, S. Kimenju, B. Munyua
KARI: C. Bett
International Food Policy Research Institute Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
International Center for the Improvement of Maize ACDI/VOCA/Kenya Maize Development Program
and Wheat Kenya Agricultural Research Institute
International Crops Research Institute for the Semi- Institut d’Economie Rurale
Arid Tropics The Eastern Africa Grain Council
University of Pittsburgh

2.  Knowledge: the degree of factual understanding of
the topic and associated issues.
 Attitude and perceptions: feelings toward the
subject, including judgment of its importance and
influence on people’s lives.
 Practices: current actions taken as a result of the
knowledge, attitude and perception toward the
issues.

3.  Evaluate the effectiveness of
information campaigns – assist
policymakers in customizing
educational programs .
Flyer from Eastern Kenya

4.  Knowledge of Attributes of Aflatoxin exposure (i.e. human health
symptoms such as stomach pain, diarrhea, vomiting, etc.).
 Knowledge of Causes (Moisture) of Aflatoxin exposure (e.g.
wetness in piles of harvested maize, poor storage condition,
dampness in storage place, improper drying, etc.).
 Attitude (Reaction) about Aflatoxin safety (i.e. farmers’ attitude
towards potential outbreaks in their village).
 Perception of Risk (i.e. understanding risks of storing wet maize,
buying maize from local markets, insect/pest damage, etc.).
 Actions (Container) (i.e. using storage practices that avoid
Aflatoxin such as maintaining humidity and cleanliness in storage).

5. LT
Dry

7. Frequency Percentage
Local Language Radio 197 40.4%
Kiswahili Radio 118 24.2%
Extension Officer 65 13.3%
Neighbor 37 7.6%
TV 26 5.3%
English Radio 13 2.7%
School 12 2.5%
Newspaper 8 1.6%
Chief Council 6 1.2%
Health Worker 2 0.4%
Church 1 0.2%
Buyers/Traders 3 0.6%
Note: Percentages are of respondents who had heard of aflatoxin (n=488),
total sample size (n=1343).

9. Knowledge Knowledge Attitude Perception Action
VARIABLES Attributes Afla moisture Reaction risk container
Female 0.02 -0.45 0.08 0.11 0.004
Education of hh -0.28 -0.25 0.66*** 0.48*** -0.03
Number of children <5 0.15 -0.09 0.05 0.01 0.1*
Head's prim non-Ag -0.23 -0.82 0.04 -0.005 -0.02
Wealth -0.01 0.11 0.18*** 0.14*** 0.002
Land owned -0.19 0.013 0.05 0.03 -0.08
HH selling maize -0.05 -0.27 -0.06 0.05 -0.13
dry transitional -2.6*** -5.5*** 1.54*** 1.18*** -0.26
dry mid-altitudes -1.07* -6.09*** 1.84*** 1.3*** -0.36
moist mid-altitudes -1.48*** -5.39*** -0.72* -0.89** 0.036
moist transitional -1.32*** -4.82*** 0.07 -0.06 -0.089
high tropics -1.90*** -4.52*** 0.008 -0.06 0.12
Constant -1.73** 9.21*** -2.71*** -2.75*** -0.64**
Observations 1,042 1,042 1,042 1,042 1,042
chi2 23.56 1440 153.4 182.6 22.07
pval 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04
Log Lik -121 -1032 -630.3 -468.9 -661.3
BIC -6992 -7100 -6607 -6790 -6740
AIC 0.257 2.005 1.235 0.925 1.294

10.  Higher education has a positive effect on perception of risk associated with
storing wet maize, buying from local markets as well as farmers’ attitude towards
potential outbreaks in their village
 Farm size is not correlated with farmers’ actions to prevent and reduce aflatoxin
risks at the farm level using containers.
 Wealth is positively associated with farmers reaction (attitudes) to aflatoxin in
their village and perception of risks associated with storing wet maize, buying
maize from local markets, insect/pest damage.
 In the dry transitional area where the 2004 outbreaks occurred, the effects on the
perception of risk of aflatoxin and attitudes to aflatoxin safety is expected.
 Number of children under 5 had a positive and significant effect on actions to
prevent and reduce aflatoxin risks at the farm level.

11.  Social networks
 What is the effect of social network on knowledge of aflatoxin ?
 Which networks has the most influence in the disseminating knowledge?
 How can networks be useful in turning them to correct actions?
 Aflatoxin prevalence
 Does KAP on aflatoxin influence prevalence levels?
 Future work -Impact of education/radio campaigns
 Randomized controls and see what factors altered KAP indices and aflatoxin
levels