Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Farmers’ access to agricultural service institutions

412 views

Published on

Farmers’ Access to Agricultural Service Institutions, by Dr. Kaikaus Ahmad, IFPRI

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Farmers’ access to agricultural service institutions

  1. 1. Farmers’ Access to Agricultural Service Institutions Kaikaus Ahmad Bangladesh Policy Research and Strategy Support Program International Food Policy Research Institute Workshop on The Feed the Future Zone in the South and the Rest of Bangladesh: A Comparison of Food Security Aspects 16 January 2013 Dhaka
  2. 2. Agricultural Service Institutions• Agricultural services, comprises the entire set of organizations that support people engaged in agricultural production and facilitate their efforts to solve problems; link to markets and other players in the agricultural value chain; and obtain information, skills, and technologies to improve their livelihoods (Birner et al. 2009; Davis 2009) 2
  3. 3. Role of Agricultural Service Institutions• Extension and advisory services play a central role in the agricultural development process: both in terms of technology transfer and human resource development• Short term: economic criteria related to technology transfer and increasing productivity• Long term: sustainable agricultural practices and rural development 3
  4. 4. Farmers Require Services for:• Appropriate technological options and management of technologies• Changing farm system options• Sourcing input suppliers and time to buy inputs• Collective action with other farmers• Consumer and market demands for products and quality of produce• Implications of changing policies (input subsidies, trade liberalization)• Access to credit and loans• Sustainable natural resource management and coping with climate change 4
  5. 5. Focus of the Analysis• Bangladesh Integrated Household Survey, 2011• Outreach of Agricultural Extension Services• Impact of extension services on technology adoption and productivity• Access to credit (public and private)• Impact of credit on technology adoption and productivity• A comparison of the performance of agricultural service institutions between the FtF zone in south and the national level• Conclusion 5
  6. 6. Percent of farmers consulted an agriculturalextension agent during the last 12 months? 6
  7. 7. Percent of farmers who were visited byextension agent and said the advice was useful 7
  8. 8. Yield (ton/hectare) for small farmers cultivating HYV Boro rice: visited vs. not visited 8
  9. 9. Muriate of Potash (MP) 9
  10. 10. Percent of farmers currently have any credit (by farm size) 10
  11. 11. Sources of credit to farmers (by farm size) 11
  12. 12. Percent of farmers (by farm size) have credit for agricultural and non-agricultural purposes 12
  13. 13. Proportion of HYV Boro farmers: agricultural credit vs. no credit 13
  14. 14. Summary• Famers consider extension service very useful• Extension service is reaching mostly to large and medium farmers• Outreach of agricultural service is relatively better in FtF zone• Small farmers appear to benefit more from extension compared to other category of farmers considering their higher yield 14
  15. 15. Summary (cont’d)• Farmers tend to diversify fertilizer use when they get advice from extension services• Farmers depend heavily on credit• Marginal and small farmers constitute the largest share of farmers, yet they get very little institutional credit• Marginal farmers borrow more for other purposes than agriculture• Farmers adopt better technology when they get agricultural credit 15
  16. 16. Policy Implications• Agricultural service institutions can play effective role in technology adoption• Marginal and small farmers constitute the largest share of farmers, yet they get little access to agricultural service institutions• Policies should be made to reach agricultural institutional services to marginal and small farmers 16

×