INJIBARA UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND CLIMATE SCIENCE

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS

FACTOR AFFACTING ADOPTION OF AGRICULTURAL TECHNOLOGY IN

ETHIOPIA

SUBMIITTETD TO DEPARTMENT OF AGRICALTURAL ECONOMICS

ADVISSOR NAME: NARDOS D

APRIL 2021
INJIBARA, ETHIOPIA

1
GROUP NAME ID NO

1. ABDU HUSSEN IUNSR/011/12

2. BETELHEM ABEBAW IUNSR/176/12
3. GARI MERDASA IUNSR/313/12
4. NATNAEL AWASH IUNSR/746/12
5. NITSUH TEBIKEW IUNSR/493/12

2
 TABLE OF CONTENT PAGE

ABRIVATION AND ACRONYM……………………………………….........................

………………4
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study…………………………………...................
…………………………5
1.2 Objective…………………………………………...........................
………………………………….7
1.2.1 General Objective………………....................
……………………………………………..7
1.2.2 Specific Objective……………….....................
…………………………………………….7
2. LITRATURE REVIEW
2.1.1 Agricultural Technology Adoption……………………..............
………………………….8
2.1.2 Factors Influencing Agricultural Technology Adoption...…………………………10
2.2.1 Economic Factors……………………………….....................
………………………………...11
2.2.1.1 Credit Constraints…………………...................
………………………………………12
2.2.1.2 Cost of Technology……………………..................
………………………………….12
2.2.1.3 Level of Expected Benefit…………..............
……………………………………...13
2.2.1.4 Off-farm Hours………………………….....................
…………………………………13
2.2.2 Social Factors…………………………………….........................
……………………………….14

3
 2.2.2.1 Age of Adopter………………………......................
……………………………………14
2.2.2.2 Education…………………........................
……………………………………………….14
2.2.2.3 Gender Concerns………………....................
………………………………………….15
2.2.3 Institutions……………………………...........................
…………………………………………..16
2.2.3.1 Information……………….......................
………………………………………………..17
2.2.3.2 Extension Contacts………………..................
………………………………………..18
2.2.4 Climate………………………………………….............................
………………………………...18
3. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
3.1 Conclusion………………………….............................
………………………………………………19
3.2 Recommendation…………........................
………………………………………………………..20
4. REFERENCE………………………...............................
………………………………………………...22

ABBRIVATION AND ACRONYM

(CSA)- Central Statistical Agency

(EEA)- Ethiopian Economic Association
(FAO)- Food and Agricultural Organization

4
(GDP)- Growth domestic product
(IFPRI)- International food policy research institution
(IPM)- Integrated Pest Management
(MDG)- Millennium Development Goal
Mo FED Ministry of Finance and Economic Development
(RBST)- Recombinant Bovine Somatotropin Technology
(WB)- World Bank
(WFP)- World Food Progra

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Review

Major economic and social measures have shown that agriculture is the dominant sector in the
Ethiopian economy. In Ethiopia, economic development cannot be realized if proper attention is
not given to the agriculture sector, which contributes 43%of GDP (at factor cost), 96% of
employment opportunity, 90% of export earnings and 70 of raw materials for domestic industries
(Muluken G. et al, 2021). Despite its highest share in the country’s economy, the performance of
the agricultural sector is very poor. The land productivity is low with an average yield of

5
1.23tons/ha for food grains. The sector is dominated by small holder agriculture, which is
characterized by the use of traditional technologies, poor resource base, and rain fed production
system (CSA, 2011).Concerning the situation of rural producers of a developing and under
developed countries like Ethiopia adoption of agricultural technology is urgently required to
increase the productivity so as to meet the increasing demand of food (cereals and animal
products) for rapidly growing population. The adoption of agricultural technologies, especially in
subsistence farming, would be governed by a complex set of factors such as human capital,
information, location, resource endowments and institutional support. Within this frame
condition, farmers’ decision depends on their needs, cost incurred and benefit accruing to it
would be the major motivating factors for the acceptance or rejection of a particular technology.

In a dynamic environment, it is argued that farmers encounter considerable inefficiencies before

the realization of the intended gains from technological change. In other words, there is a time
lag between farmers’ adoption of a new technology and achieving efficient use of that
technology. Knowledge of the extent and causes of such inefficiencies among adopters of
improved technology will guide policy makers to help increase agricultural production by
designing more effective and efficient institutional support services. In an effort to raise
agricultural production and productivity, policy makers in developing countries have placed
substantial emphasis on new production technologies and their adoption by farmers (Ashenafi
2016). Majority of households (85%) in Ethiopia are smallholders who live in the rural areas and
depend on agriculture as their major economic activity. They are involved in crop or livestock
production, or both, where livestock provide draught power for crop production, and crop
residues are used as animal feed (Central Statistical Agency (CSA, 2011).

The development strategy of the Ethiopian government aims to ensure greater food security
through increased use of improved agricultural production technologies, including fertilizer,
improved seeds, chemicals, and improved cultural practices, however, while various incentive
measures have been used to induce farmers to achieve a high rate of adoption of the chosen
modern technologies. Technologies must be adopted, which occurs only when they add value to
the individuals, firms, industries, and nations who adopt them. To understand the role of
technology, it is important to understand the adoption process. Understanding the factors that

6
affect adoption and knowing how benefits are likely to be distributed allows technology-
promoters to target their programs. Economists have devoted great attention traditionally to the
technology adoption process at both individual farmer and aggregate levels. At the individual
farmer level, considerable work has focused on identifying biophysical, human capital and
economic determinants of adoption of modern agricultural innovations such as high-yielding.
Green Revolution Varieties and complementary inputs such as irrigation, fertilizers and
pesticides. However, while the adoption of low external input technologies have received
considerable attention in developed countries (Weersink et al., 1992). In the developing world,
research has been significantly less, especially compared to the importance of these systems
among farmers globally. So, it becomes essential to review factors affecting adoption of
agricultural technology.

1.2 Objective

1.2.1 General Objective

 To review factors that affect adoption of agricultural technology in the farmers

1.2.2 Specific Objectives

 To review socio-economic factors affecting adoption of agricultural technology

 To review institutional factor affecting adoption of agricultural technology
 To review climatic factors affecting adoption of agricultural technology
 To review history of adoption of agricultural technology in Ethiopia

7
 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. AGRICUILTURAL TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION

According to (Alemayew, 2019) “Adoption” is a process consists of three stages namely pre
adoption, adoption and post- adoption. At the pre-adoption stage, people may examine a new
technology and consider adopting it. At the adoption stage, they form an intention to adopt the
technology, and they eventually purchase and use it. At the post-adoption stage, people can
either continue or discontinue using the technology. It is well recognized that improvement in
agricultural productivity among farmers is achieved through improved agricultural technologies.

According to (Dessalegn, 2008) define the term “technology” in a variety of ways uses the words
‘technology’ and ‘innovation’ synonymously and defines technology as the design for
instrumental action that reduces the uncertainty in the cause-effect relationship involved in
achieving a desired outcome. A more meaningful definition may be that a technology is a set of
‘new ideas’. New ideas are associated with some degree of uncertainty and hence a lack of
predictability on their outcome. For a technology to impact on the economic system, blending
into the normal routine of the intended economic system without upsetting the system’s state of
affairs is required. This entails overcoming the uncertainty associated with the new technologies.
It therefore comes as no surprise that several studies set out to establish what these factors are,

8
and how they can be eliminated (if constraints) or promoted (if enhancers) to achieve technology
adoption. Perhaps a clearer definition of the term ‘technology’ can be obtained from the work by
(Enos and Park, 1988).

According to (Alemayew, 2019), define technology as the general knowledge or information that
permits some tasks to be accomplished, some service rendered, or some products manufactured
explain that it is the actual application of that knowledge that would be termed ‘technology’. The
focus was nonagricultural; this definition fits agricultural technologies too. From their definition,
it is clear that technology is aimed at easing work of the entity to which it applies. Most
technologies are therefore consequently termed ‘labor-saving’, ‘time-saving’, ‘capital-saving’ or
‘energy-saving’ and so forth. To economists this implies saving on resources that are
scarce.According to (Zilberman, 2012), Adoption is an outcome of a decision to accept a given
innovation while quoting defines adoption as “a mental process an individual passes from first
hearing about an innovation to final utilization.

Much scholarly interest on adoption falls in two categories: rate of adoption, and intensity of
adoption. It is usually necessary to distinguish between these two concepts as they often have
different policy implications. Rate of adoption, the relative speed with which farmers adopt an
innovation, has as one of its pillars, the element of ‘time’. On the other hand, intensity of
adoption refers to the level of use of a given technology in any time period. Clearly, a technology
that is being adopted has an edge over conventional practices. Usually, a technological
innovation encompasses at least some degree of benefit for its potential adopters. Adoption
process is the change that takes place within individual with regards to an innovation from the
moment that they first become aware of the innovation to the final decision to use it or not.
Adoption does not necessarily follow the suggested stages from awareness to adoption; trial may
not always practice by farmers to adopt new technology (Journal, 2012).

Farmers may adopt the new technology by passing the trial stage. In some cases, particularly
with environmental innovations, farmers may hold awareness and knowledge but because of

9
other factors affecting the decision-making process, adoption does not occur. The decision to
adopt an innovation is not normally a single instantaneous act; it involves a process. Adoption is
a decision-making process, in which an individual goes through a number of mental stages
before making a final decision to adopt an innovation. Decision-making process is the process
through which an individual passes from first knowledge of an innovation, to forming an attitude
toward an innovation, to a decision to adopt or reject, to implementation of new idea, and to
confirmation of the decision (Tadesse, 2008). Awareness of a need is generally perceived as a
first step in adoption process. The other stages are: Interest, Evaluation, Acceptance, Trial, and
finally, Adoption. The analysis also notes that these stages occur as a continuous sequence of
events, actions and influences that intervene between initial knowledge about an idea, product or
practice, and the actual adoption of it. However, not all decisions involve a clear-cut sequence. In
fact most recent literature suggests that these stages may occur concurrently and some may/not
occur in adoption decision processes (Jackline, 2008).

According to (Cameron, 1999) the dynamic process of adoption involves learning about a
technology over time. In fact many innovations require a lengthy period often of many years
from the time they become available to the time they are widely adopted. The average time
between initial information and final adoption varies considerably by person, place and practice.
Demonstrate that the time after the initial investment in research through the generation of pre

technology knowledge up to maximum adoption by producers involves many long, variable and
uncertain lags.

2.2 Factors Influencing Agricultural Technology Adoption

A variety of studies are aimed at establishing factors underlying adoption of various

technologies. As such, there is an extensive body of literature on several factors have been found
to affect adoption. These include economic, climate change, social, institutional factors and
delivery mechanism. Age of potential adopter, social status of farmers, education level and
gender-related aspects, household size, and farming experience; Management factors:

10
membership to organizations, the capacity to borrow, and concerns about environmental
degradation and human health of farmers; Institutional/technology delivery mechanisms:
information access, extension services, and prior participation in, and training in pest control
practices. Some studies classify the above factors into broad categories: farmer characteristics,
farm structure, institutional characteristics and managerial structure (Jackline, 2008).
Agricultural practices are not adopted in a social and economic vacuum brought in yet another
category of classification. He categorizes factors influencing adoption as informational,
economic and ecological. Here is no clear distinguishing feature between elements within each
category.

Perhaps it is not necessary to try and make clear-cut distinctions between different categories of
adoption factors. Besides, categorization usually is done to suit the current technology being
investigated, the location, and the researcher’s preference, or even to suit client needs. However,
as some might argue, categorization may be necessary in regard to policy implementation.
Extensive work on agricultural adoption in developing countries was pioneered. Since then, the
amount of literature on this subject has expanded tremendously. Because of this extensive
literature, the following section provides a review of selected factors as they relate to agricultural
technology adoption.

2.2.1 Economic Factors

The contribution of new technology to economic growth can only be realized when and if the
new technology is widely diffused and used. Diffusion itself results from a series of individual
decisions to begin using the new technology, decisions which are often the result of a
comparison of the uncertain benefits of the new invention with the uncertain costs of adopting it.
An understanding of the factors affecting this choice is essential both for economists studying the
determinants of growth and for the generators and disseminators of such technologies. A national
representative data set from rural area covering (Jack line, 2008).

Econometric analysis of new agricultural technology adoption indicates that, holding other
factors constant, households with memberships in agricultural associations and access to
agricultural advisory services and rural credit are more likely to adopt new agricultural
technologies. Changes in technology adoption are associated with changes in extension access
and changes in credit access as well as initial status of farm household in terms of access to

11
credit and access to extension services. A lack of assets will limit technology adoption “If you
have money, everything with you otherwise you cannot acquire what you want” (Journal, 2012)

2.2.1.1 Credit Constraints

The major option for increased adoption of technology is to overcome the income/ capital
constraint through increased credit provision. Access to credit is an indicator which manifests
itself in other factors, such as farm size (since a farmer can borrow more money against a larger
farm than a smaller farm, all other things being equal), human capital (because farmers with
more education are better informed about credit practices and can even shop around for
competitive interest rates), and tenure (since a sharecropper does not own land, and cannot
borrow against its value). Lee notes that increased access to credit sources can help farmers
surmount short-run liquidity constraints and increase technology adoption. Credit considerations
are of indirect concern as well because explicit and implicit interest rates determine the future
value of money, and when interest rates are high, they can make modest immediate income seem
more attractive than even large future returns. Rational farmers, comparing present opportunities
against future income streams, can therefore be expected to exhibit sensitivity to interest rates
and other credit considerations (Daku, 2002).

This makes farmers from areas with high interest rates less likely to participate in any activity in
which they forgo immediate cash for any future returns. In areas where this is the case, aid
agencies should include cash transfers, or payment for project participation, in order to overcome
the distorted discounting caused by high interest rates. Another option is to provide financing to
the communities at more reasonable interest rates, although both options risks angering local
moneylenders. MERET typically uses food transfers as payment, rather than cash. This approach
works for WFP because the targeted communities are significantly food-insecure; food transfers
in areas with sufficient food production are not advisable as they can distort food prices, leading
to lost revenue for farmers and lower production in the future.

2.2. 1.2 Cost of Technology

According to (Caswell et al., 2001) the decision to adopt is often an investment decision this
decision presents a shift in farmers’ investment options. Therefore, adoption can be expected to
be dependent on cost of a technology and on whether farmers possess the required resources.

12
Technologies that are capital-intensive are only affordable by wealthier farmers and hence the
adoption of such technologies is limited to larger farmers who have the wealth. costs lowering
the price of other inputs and raising agricultural product prices improving smallholder farmers’
access to finance for agricultural development adopting a package approach to provision of
agricultural development technologies and development and rehabilitation of infrastructure for
agricultural inputs and product.

In addition, changes that cost little are adopted more quickly than those requiring large
expenditures; hence both extent and rate of adoption may be dependent on the cost of a
technology. Economic theory suggests that a reduction in price of a good or service can result in
more of it being demanded.

2.2.1.3 Level of Expected benefits

Programs that produce significant gains can motivate people to participate more fully in them. In
fact, people do not participate unless they believe it is in their best interest to do so. Farmers
must see an advantage or expect to obtain greater utility in adopting a technology. In addition,
farmers must perceive that there is a problem that warrants an alternative action to be taken.
Without a significant difference in outcomes between two options, and in the returns from
alternative and conventional practices, it is less likely that farmers, especially small-scale farmers
will adopt the new practice (Jack line 2008).

Farmers may receive little long-term benefits from adoption, which negatively influences
adoption. A higher percentage of total household income coming from the farm through
increased yield tends to correlate positively with adoption of new technologies.

2.2.1.4 off-Farm Hours

The availability of time is an important factor affecting technology adoption. It can influence
adoption in either a negative or positive manner. Practices that heavily draw on farmer’s leisure
time may inhibit adoption. However, practices that leave time for other sources of income
accumulation may promote adoption. In such cases, as well as in general, income from off-farm
labor may provide financial resources required to adopt the new technology.

13
2.2.2 Social Factors

2.2.2.1 Age of Adopter

Age is another factor thought to affect adoption. Age is said to be a primary latent characteristic
in adoption decisions. However there is contention on the direction of the effect of age on
adoption. Productive age was found to positively influence adoption of sorghum in Burkina
Faso (DEBRA, 2004). The effect is thought to stem from accumulated knowledge and
experience of farming systems obtained from years of observation and experimenting with
various technologies. In addition, since adoption pay-offs occur over a long period of time, while
costs occur in the earlier phases, age (time) of the farmer can have a profound effect on
technology adoption. Age was either not significant or was negatively related to adoption. Older
farmers, perhaps because of investing several years in a particular practice, may not want to
jeopardize it by trying out a completely new method. In addition, farmers’ perception that
technology development and the subsequent benefits, require a lot of time to realize, can reduce
their interest in the new technology because of farmers’ advanced age, and the possibility of not
living long enough to enjoy it.

Furthermore, elderly farmers often have different goals other than income maximization, in
which case, they will not be expected to adopt an income-enhancing technology. As a matter of
fact, it is expected that the old that do adopt a technology do so at a slow pace because of their
tendency to adapt less swiftly to a new phenomenon (jack line 2008).

2.2.2.2 Education

Studies that have sought to establish the effect of education on adoption in most cases relate it to
years of formal schooling. Generally education is thought to create a favorable mental attitude
for the acceptance of new practices especially of information-intensive and management-
intensive practices. Frequently stated to be a complex technology Indicates that technology
complexity has a negative effect on adoption. However, education is thought to reduce the
amount of complexity perceived in a technology thereby increasing a technology’s adoption.
According to Ehler and Bottrell (2000). One of the hindrances to widespread adoption of IPM
(integrated pest management) as an alternative method to chemical control is that it requires
greater ecological understanding of the production system. For IPM, the relevance of education

14
comes to play in a number of ways. First, effective IPM requires regular field monitoring of pests
conditions to identify the critical periods for application of a pesticide or other control measures.

Farmers’ knowledge of insect life cycles is also crucial when precision is required about the best
stage of the life cycle to apply a particular control strategy. In addition, knowledge of the
possible dangers from improper use of particular practices may direct farmers to the safest
application procedure regarding a given control strategy especially where chemicals are
involved. The ability to read and understand sophisticated information that may be contained in a
technological package is an important aspect of adoption. In the case of IPM, the ability to
comprehend pesticide application instructions and proper measurement required in certain
control strategies becomes useful. Furthermore, distribution of knowledge reduces the risk of
adopting a new technology. Increased education is thus expected to improve IPM adoption
(Daku, 2002). Thus, education positively affected adoption.

2.2.2.3 Gender Concerns

Gender issues in agricultural production and technology adoption have been investigated for a
long time. Most show mixed evidence regarding the different roles men and women play in
technology adoption. In the most recent studies factors influencing improved maize technology
adoption (jack line, 2008).

The latter study notes effort in improving women’s working skills does not appear warranted as
their technical efficiency is estimated to be equivalent to that of males. Since adoption of a
practice is guided by the utility expected from it, the effort put into adopting it is reflective of
this anticipated utility. It might then be expected that the relative roles women and men play in
both ‘effort’ and ‘adoption’ are similar, hence suggesting that males and females adopt practices
equally (Daku, 2002). Results of studies in have shown that male headed households have more
access to land, education, and information on new technologies. There is a strong association
between the gender of the household head and adoption of technological recommendations
(journal, 2012).

2.2.3 Institutions

Institutional factors deal with the extent or degree to which institutions impact on technology
adoption by smallholders. Institutions include all the services to agricultural development, such

15
as finance, insurance and information dissemination. They also include facilities and
mechanisms that enhance farmers’ access to productive inputs and product markets. Institutions
also include the embedded norms, behaviors’ and practices in society. Researchers and
development practitioners should also consider issues that relate to the farmers’ exposure to
economic, agro-meteorological, biophysical and social shocks in designing technologies for
smallholders. Care should be taken to avoid technologies with a high investment cost structure
which smallholders cannot afford because they are poor and lack the necessary resources. For
example, the practice that the production of certain types of crops are the preserve of male
members of society can limit the adoption of a particular technology in Sub-Saharan Africa if the
crop to be promoted is grown mainly by men. This is because women constitute the majority of
rural dwellers in this part of Africa. Clearly therefore, an understanding of local cultural practices
and preferences is important if they are to benefit from agricultural research (Meinzen and Dick
et al., 2004).

Synergies need to be created between government departments, non-governmental organizations,

researchers, donors and local communities in implementing programs that promote smallholder
farmers’ adoption of technologies which can increase agricultural productivity and reduce
environmental degradation and the deterioration of soil quality. Measures that can be taken to
increase adoption of yield-enhancing technologies include lowering fertilizer. A situation has
consequently arisen where the disseminated messages to the majority of the extension audience,
have become technically redundant and obsolete. An additional problem is that most extension
services tend to focus on the well-resourced, wealthier farmers and perceive farmers as simply
agents of change (Nkonya et al., 2004).Major problems is that year after year extension workers
who are hardly afforded in-service training, and are loosely linked to research, continue to
disseminate the same messages repeatedly to the same audience

2.2.3.1 Information

Information plays a key role in the adoption of agricultural technologies. Information about a
technology can come from own experience and/ or external sources. Information from external
sources comes from formal institutions such as BoARD, NGOs, and the mass media or through
informal mechanisms such as farmer’s organizations or networks of friends, relatives and
acquaintances. Adoption and diffusion process comprises hearing about an innovation to final

16
adoption of the technologies. The heart of the diffusion process is modeling and imitation by
potential adopters of their near friends and groups who have previously adopted a new idea. In
deciding whether or not to adopt an innovation, we all depend mainly on the communicated
experience of others much like ourselves who have already adopted. These subjective
evaluations of innovations mainly flow through interpersonal networks. For this reason, we must
understand the nature of networks if we are to comprehend the diffusion of innovations fully
(Dessalegn, 2008). Exposure to information about new technologies as such significantly affects
farmers’ choices about it. Indicate how, provided a technology is profitable, increased
information induces its adoption. However in the case where experience within the general
population about a specific technology is limited, more information induces negative attitudes
towards its adoption, probably because more information exposes an even bigger information
vacuum hence increasing the risk associated with it. A good example is the adoption of
recombinant bovine Somatotropin Technology (RBST) in dairy production (Jackline, 2008).

Information is acquired through informal sources like the media, extension personnel, visits,
meetings, and farm organizations and through formal education. It is important that this
information be reliable, consistent and accurate. Thus, the right mix of information properties for
a particular technology is needed for effectiveness in its impact on adoption.

2.2.3.2 Extension Contacts

Good extension programs and contacts with producers are a key aspect in technology
dissemination and adoption. A recent publication stated that “a new technology is only as good
as the mechanism of its dissemination” to farmers. Most studies analyzing this variable in the
context of agricultural technology show its strong positive influence on adoption (IFPRI).

2.2.4 Climate

Challenged by multitudes of factors of which climate related disasters like drought and flood,
which often causes famine, are the major ones. The knowledge of the adaptation methods and
factors affecting the perceptions to climate change enhance policy towards tackling the
challenges that climate change is imposing on Ethiopian farmers. Some attempts have been made
to study the impact of climate change on Ethiopian agriculture. Identified potential adaptation
measures to cope with adverse impacts of climate change on crop and livestock production but

17
failed to indicate the factors which dictate the choice of any of the adaptation measures implied.
Employed the Ricardian approach to estimate the monetary impact of climate change on
Ethiopian agriculture. Even though, the applied Ricardian approach includes adaptation, it does
not address factors affecting perceptions to climate change. Adaptation to climate change is a
two-step process, which initially requires the perception that climate is changing and then
responding to changes through adaptation (Temesgen, 2011).

According to (Kurukulasuriya, 2006). Agriculture is negatively affected by climate change to

climate change refers to adjustment in natural or human systems in response to actual or
expected climatic stimuli or their effects, which moderates harm or exploits beneficial
opportunities. Common adaptation methods in agriculture include use of new crop varieties and
livestock species that are better suited to drier conditions, irrigation, crop diversification,
adoption of mixed crop and livestock farming systems, and changing planting dates identified
potential adaptation measures for coping with adverse impacts of climate change on crop and
livestock production, but it failed to indicate the factors that dictate the choice of adaptation
measures.

Employed the Ricardian approach to estimate the monetary impact of climate change on
Ethiopian agriculture. Even though, the applied approach includes adaptation, it does not identify
the determinants of each of the adaptation methods used by farmers. Additionally, adaptation to
climate change is a two-step process: first, the household must perceive that the climate is
changing and then respond to changes through adaptation. Knowledge of the climatic conditions
of the country and the adaptation options available to farmers will assist policy aimed at
decreasing vulnerability of farmers to future climate changes (Temesgen, 2008).

3. CONCLUSOIN AND RECOMMENDATION

3 .1 Conclusion

Major economic and social measures have shown that agriculture is the dominant sector in the
Ethiopian economy. The adoption of agricultural technologies, especially in subsistence farming,
would be governed by a complex set of factors such as human capital, information, social,
resource endowments and institutional support. However, improved technology is not randomly

18
distributed to the two groups of the households (adopters and non-adopters), but rather the
households themselves deciding to adopt or not to adopt based on the information they have.

Adoption process is the change that takes place within individual with regards to an innovation
from the moment that they first become aware of the innovation to the final decision to use it or
not. Adoption does not necessarily follow the suggested stages from awareness to adoption; trial
may not always practice by farmers to adopt new technology. Econometric analysis of new
agricultural technology adoption indicates that, holding other factors constant, households with
memberships in agricultural associations and access to agricultural advisory services and rural
credit are more likely to adopt new agricultural technologies.

Information plays a key role in the adoption of agricultural technologies. Information about a
technology can come from own experience and/ or external sources. In deciding whether or not
to adopt an innovation, we all depend mainly on the communicated experience of others much
like ourselves who have already adopted. These subjective evaluations of innovations mainly
flow through interpersonal networks. For this reason, we must understand the nature of networks
if we are to comprehend the diffusion of innovations fully. Generally, to adopt agricultural
technology the technology is less cost, more benefit and adaptable the climate.

.3.2 Recommendation

As the review shows, one of the major constraints that people not to adopt new technology has
been identified and perceived was low community participation on technology adoption by
means of different factors. In fact, changing the mind and behavior of human being is not an
easy task. To bring about behavioral and attitudinal changes it needs patience. Therefore, before
execution of any program, changing the attitude of people by educating and motivating them is
very important. The fundamental objective of extension is to develop the rural people
economically, socially and culturally by means of education. A continuous awareness creation
work has to be done through the local leaders of the area.

The main factors affecting adoption of agriculture technology are economic, social and
institutional factors. A lack of assets, such as land, education or equipment, will limit technology
adoption. That means more attention of further studies and development efforts needs to be paid
to technologies that require few assets. Decision makers also need to recognize that technologies
that build on assets which the poor farmers already have are more likely to be adopted. To
19
encourage adoption of new technologies, pro-poor agricultural researchers must look beyond
simply boosting productivity. They should emphasize certain variables which reduce the
farmers’ vulnerability to loss of income, bad health, natural disasters, and other factors. In
addition, an understanding of local cultural practices and preferences is important if smallholder
farmers are to benefit from agricultural technologies developed through research. Factors
affecting the perceptions to climate change enhance policy towards tackling the challenges that
climate change is imposing on Ethiopian farmers. All these forms a potentially useful area of
study for future research. Governmental and non-governmental organization should give
awareness about the importance of technology. Government of Ethiopia are to promote adoption
of agricultural technology, must make appropriate institutional and credit access for farmers.

20
 4. REFERENCE

Arega D. Alene and Manfred Zeller(2005), Technology Adoption and Farmer Efficiency in
Multiple Crops Production in Eastern Ethiopia: Vol. 6, No 1 5.

Caswell, M., K. Fuglie., C. Ingram., S. Jans and C. Kascak (2001).“Adoption of Agricultural

Production Practices: Agriculture Economic Report No. 792. Washington DC

DessalegnMolla Ketema, (2008)“Social Networksand Diffusion ofAgricultural Technology”: the

Case of Sorghumin Metema Woreda, Northern Gonder, Ethiopia,

Alemayehu (2019 )definition of adoption of technology

.IFPRI,”International Food Policy Research Institute. Pest Management and Food Production:”
Looking into the future, Vol. 20, no. 52.

Jackline Bonabana-Wabbi (2008) “Assessing Factors Affecting Adoption of Agricultural

Technologies:” The Case of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in Kumi District, Eastern
Uganda

Journal of Sustainable Development; (2012) “The Impacts of Technology Adoption on

Smallholder Agricultural Productivity in Sub-Saharan Africa:”A Review Published

21
Temesgen Deressa (2008),“Analysis of perception and Adaptation to Climate Change in the Nile
basin of Ethiopia.”

World Bank (2007) - Beating the Odds: Sustaining Inclusion in a Growing Economy.

22