Utilization of Digital and Communication Technologies (DCTs) in Agriculture by the Farmers

Utilization of Digital and Communication Technologies (DCTs) in Agriculture by the Farmers

Kharge AP , Kadam RP^* , Pawar GS

Department of Extension Education, College of Agriculture, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani - 431 402, India

Corresponding Author Email: rpk.mkv@gmail.com

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.53709/ CHE.2020.v01i01.019

Abstract

Keywords

Download this article as:

INTRODUCTION

            Digital and Communication Technologies (DCT) can be referred to red as electronic and digital technologies for storing, processing, transferring information and communication. In the present era, new avenues in the form of Digital and Communication Technology (DCT) are being used to disseminate agricultural information. The DCT’s range from a simple person to person tools like email and social media messaging to complex tools such as machine to machine remote sensing tools used in primary industries [1]. Another report found that 97 per cent of users use mobile as one of the devices to access the internet. While internet users grew by 7 per cent in urban India, reaching 315 million users in 2018 and digital adoption is now being propelled by rural India, registering a 35 per cent growth in internet users over the past year. It is now estimated that there are 251 million internet users in rural India, which is expected to reach 290 million by the end of 2019 [2].

Information is a valuable input through which farmers adopt new technologies to make farming more profitable. The application of Digital and Communication Technology (DCT) offerbroaderer possibilities, thereby strengthening the transfer of technology between research and extension systems and further on word transmission to the individuals. The old ICT tools example like radio, television, video, films, slides, pictures, print media, telephone, etc., are being used to disseminate the information to the grassroots level users.The modern Digital and communication Technologies (DCT) tools like agriculture mobile app, mobile SMS service, e-learning, video-conferencing, e-mail, Facebook, Whatsapp, Youtube, Twitter, blog, Wikipedia, web portal. Another Kisan Krishideepam, IFFCO kisan app, e-NAM, Kisan Kerala, Agri-media app, e-SAP, Kisan Mitra, telephone, films, slides, radio, etc., these tools are wireless communication technology along with powerful software which can process and integrate sound, text, video into electronic media. Apart from these other Digital and Communication Technologies (DCT) tools used, the above tools are the prominently used by the farmers and general Indian populations.

Keeping in view the factual position the present research study was undertaken with the following specific objective:

1. Profile characteristics of farmers about utilization of digital communication technologies in agriculture
2. To study the utilization of digital communication technologies by the farmers

MATERIALS AND METHODS

            The present study was carried out in Marthe athwada region of Maharashtra State durfrom19-20. The present investigation was carried out in Marathwada region for the study one district is selected randomly, i.e. Parbhani.In Parbhani district of three talukas selected randomly i.e. Parbhani, Gangakhed, and Purna.     In selectedtalukas three villages were randomly selected, thus total nine villages were selected for the present investigation. From each selected village, fifteen (15) farmers were selected randomly. That farmer who uses smartphones with internet facilities is available and engaged in agricultural operations was selected as a respondent. Thus, 135 (Total 9 × 15 = 135) respondents for the present study. The utilization of digital communication technologies by the farmers depicts the extent of use of DCT tools, Duration of use of DCT tools, and extent of purpose for use of DCT tools. An interview schedule was preparedllect the information in line with the objectives of the study. Personal interview technique was used for data collection. The ex-post-facto research design was used for the present study. The data collected from the selected respondent during investigation was entered and tabulated in the excel worksheet and then appr. Thennalysis of data was made according to objectives formulated for study. Further, the statistical techniques were applied to analyze tabulated data and interpret it to reach the findings. Statistical methods to be used viz. mean, standard deviation, Karl Pearson’s correlation coefficient, frequency and percentage.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Profile characteristics of farmers

The profile characteristics of farmers are presented in table 1. The results in table 1 show that the majority 58.52 per cent of the respondents belonged to the middle age group, followed by 21.48 per cent were the young category. The findings of [3] supported the results. Majority 35.56 per cent of the respondents were educated up to secondary school level, followed by 30.37 per cent of the respondents were educated up to primary school level, 15.56 per cent of the respondents were educated up to college level. The finding of [4] supported the results. Majority 61.48 per cent of the respondents belonged to categorythe  of marginal land holding, followed by 21.48 per cent of the respondents belongedbelonging to theThe finding of [5] supported the resultsng of [5]. Majority 60.74 per cent of the respondents had medium years of farming experience, followed by 23.70 per cent of the respondents had low years of farming experience. The resuThe finding of [6] supported the resultsty 58.52 per cent of the respondents belonged to medium possession of DCT tools, followed by 25.93 per cent of the respondents belonged to low possession of DCT tools. The resuThe finding of [7] supported the resultsty of 84.44 per cent respondents belonged to medium level of annual income; followed by 14.07 per cent were high level of annual income. The results wereThe finding of [8] supported the resultsn table 1 show that, majority of 63.70 per  theent of the respondent had not attenrespondentsng, followed by 22.22 per cent of respondents were attended 1 – 2 trai The results were supported by the finding of [9-13]. Majority of 60.00 per cent respondents had medium extension contact, followed by similar percentage i.e. 20.00 of the respondents had high and low extension contact. The results were supported by the finding of [14-17]. Majority of 61.48 per cent of the respondents had medium lea vel of innovativeness; followed by 20.74 per cent per cent, ael of innovativeness. The results were supported by the finding of [18-21]. Majority of 51.11 per cent of the respondents had medium level of risk orientation; followed by 25.19 pper cent,high level of risk orientation. The The finding of [22] supported the resultsjority of 51.85 per cent of the respondents had medium levela  of scientific orientation; followed by 28.15 per cent werper cent, aof scientific orientation. The results The finding of [23] supported the resultsf 57.04 per cent of the respondents had medium level of economic orientation, followed by 25.19 per cent of the respondents had high level of economic orientation. The results were supported by the finding of [24-26]. Majority of 63.70 per cent of the respondents had medium awareness; followed by 18.52 per cent were hiper cent, The results were supThe finding of [27] supported the results  

Table 1 Profile Characteristics of the respondents

To study the utilization of digital communication technologies by the farmers

            This section includes utilization of digital communication technologies by the farmers. This part depicts the extent of use of DCT tools (table 2), Duration of use of DCT tools (table 3), and extent of purpose for use of DCT tools (table 4).   

Extent of use of Digital and Communication Technologies (DCT) tools by the farmers

            Extent of use of DCTs tools was operationalized as frequency of use of Digital and Communication Technologies (DCTs) tools by the farmers for obtaining information on different areas related to agriculture. The table 2 indicateTableent of use of Digital and Cthe farmers’ ommunication Technologies (DCT) tools by the farmers. It alf of the farmers i.e. 60.00 per cent were using DCT tools medium extent, followed by low extent 20.74 per cent and rest high extent 19.26 per cent. The probable reason behind that majority of fathat most farmers areschool level, marginal land holding and medium level of annua,l income. In addition to this lack of uninterrupted power supply, inadequate internet facilities, lack of awareness about DCT tools, less exposure towards DCT, lack of training as most of farmers arand e belonged to middle age farmers belong to then of respondents according to extent of use of Digital and Communication Technologies (DCT) tools.

Duration of use of Digital and Communication Technologies (DCT) tools by the farmers.

            It refers to the duration of use of Digital and Communication Technologies (DCT) tools for various purposes which utilized by the farmers. formation regarding the duration offarmers’  use of DCT tools by the farmers were collected, tabulawas

The table 3 revealed ,that DCT tools used by farmers regarding hours per day with duration of 30 min in order to priority were, e-mail 65.1to Wikipedia and Web portal 48.41 per cent, mobile SMS service 31.85 per cent, e-learning 21.48 per cent, Instagram 11.11 per cent, Blog 7.40 per cent, Twitter 6.66 per cent, Video-conferencing, Laptop and Facebook 5.18 per cent, Computer 2.96 per cent, Agriculture Mobile Apps 2.22 per cent, Smart Phone and Information kiosk machine 1.48 per cent. The DCT tools used by farmers for 30 min. to 1 hours duration were, Wikipedia 34.07 per cent, Agriculture Mobile App 20.00 per cent, Facebook 16.29 per cent, Twitter 15.55 per cent, e-mail 14.81 per cent, Instagram 14.07 per cent, Television and Computer 8.88 per cent, Laptop 5.18 per cent, Smart phone 4.44 per cent, You tube 2.96 per cent, Blog 2.22 per cent, mobile SMS service 1.48 per cent.

            The DCT tools used by farmers for 1 to 2 hours in order to priority were, Smart to per cent, Agriculture mobile app 71.85 per cent, Television 38.51 per cent, Whatsapp and You tube 32.59 per cent, Instagram 25.92 per cent, Twitter 4.44 per cent, Computer and e-mail 2.96 per cent, Wikipedia, e-learning and Laptop 0.74 per cent. The DCT tools used by farmers for 2 to 3 hours in order to priority were, Whato per cent, You tube 62.96 per cent, Television 52.59 per cent, Smart phone 10.37 per cent, Facebook 5.92 per cent, Agriculture mobile app 4.44 per cent, Instagram 3.7 per cent.

            The transfer of agricultural technology is depends on the communication media and Digital and Communication Technologies (DCTs) tools. Smart phone, Agriculture Mobile App, WhSmartphone tube, Facebook, television considered as best means of communication as well the technology transfer. These tandration of utilization is more than others tools. Some DCT tools like Computer, Laptop, Information Kiosk Machine, Video-conferencing, etc. are less used by the respondents due to lack of training, low level of education and lack of awareness.

Table 3 Distribution of respondents according to duration of use of DCTs tools by the farmers.

Extent of purpose for use of Digital and Communication Technologies (DCT) tools

It refers to the purpose of use of Digital and communication T (DCT) tools for various purposes which utilized by the farmers. The purpose wessified into six category such as, purchase farmwas classified into six categories:eting general information, read weather condition, general agriculture news and plant protection measurement.

The table 4 revealed ,that for the purpose of ‘purchase farm input’ by the farmers accoty the DCT tools highly used was e-mail 81.48 per cent, Smart Phone 77.77 per cent, Whatsapp 68.88 per cent, Television 16.29 per cent, Agriculture mobile app 11.85 per cent, Facebook 4.44 per cent, You tube 3.70 per cent, Web portal 2.22 per cent, Computer and Wikipedia 1.48 per cent, Laptop, Mobile SMS service and Instagram 0.74 per cent.

The probable reason might be that for the purpose of ‘purchase farm input’, farmers were highly used DCT toolone due to farmers get the right information about farm input availability and prbecausethin few minutes, contact with sellers are found in cities market. There are many local agricultural Whatsapp group provides timely information about farm inputs. The other DCT tools like Television, You tube and Mobile App’s that a platform helps provide right market price information.     

            The purpose of ‘extension advisory service’ by the farmers according to priority the DCT tools highly used was Whatsapp 91.85 per cent, Television 89.62 per cent, You tube 84.44 per cent, Facebook 83.70 per cent, Agriculture Mobile app 73.33 per cent, Smart phone 72.59 per cent, Web portal 21.48 per cent, Wikipedia 20.74 per cent, e-learning 14.07 per cent, Instagram 10.37 per cent, Mobile SMS service and Blog 5.18 per cent, Computer 4.44 per cent, Twitter 3.70 per cent, Laptop and Video conferencing 1.48 per cent, e-mail 0.74 per cent.

            The probable reason behind that for the purpose of ‘extension advisory service’ farmers were hsapp, Television, You tube, Facebook, etc. tools because easily getting the extension advice about agricultural operations.    

            The purpose of ‘marketing general information’ by the farmers according to priority the DCT tools highly used was Whatsapp 65.18 per cent, e-mail 51.85 per cent, Smart phone 51.11 per cent, Television 48.81 per cent, Agriculture Mobile App 29.62 per cent, You tube 19.25 per cent, Facebook 14.07 per cent, Mobile SMS service 2.22 per cent, Web portal 1.48 per cent, Computer, Laptop, Instagram and Twitter 0.74 per cent.

Table 4 Distribution of respondents according to their extent of purpose for use of DCTs tools by the farmers.

The probable reason might be that farmers need timely information about agricultural marketing is fulfill by the use of DCT tools like Whatsapp, personal e-mail, Television and Agricultural Mobile App i.e. e-NAM.

The purpose of ‘read weather condition’ by the farmers according to priority the DCT tools highly used was Whatsapp 85.11 per cent, Television 75.55 per cent, Smart phone 71.11 per cent, Agriculture mobile app 52.69 per cent, Facebook 27.40 per cent, mobile SMS service 22.96 per cent, You tube 17.77 per cent, Computer 2.96 per cent, Laptop 2.22 per cent, Web portal 1.48 per cent, e-learning, e-mail and Wikipedia 0.74 per cent.

The reason behind that daily weather information is easily available to farmers in digital platforms like agro-met Whatsapp group, daily news on Television, weather app on Smart phone, etc. The purpose of ‘general aSmartphonenews’ by the farmers according to priority the DCT tools highly used was Television and Whatsapp is 100.00 per cent, Agriculture mobile app 97.77 per cent, smart phone 95.55 per cent, You tube 94.81 per cent, Facebook 88.14 per cent, Web portal 53.33 per cent, Twitter 22.22 per cent, Wikipedia 20.00 per cent, Instagram 17.77 per cent, Computer 11.11 per cent, e-learning 9.62 per cent, Laptop 8.88 per cent, Blog 8.14 per cent, mobile SMS service 2.96 per cent, video-conferencing and e-mail 0.74 per cent.

            The reason behind that farmer can easily watch the daily happenings in the field of a Television, You tube, Whatsapp, etc.     

The purpose of ‘plant protection measurements’ by the farmers according to priority the DCT tools highly used was Television 100.00 per cent, Whatsapp 99.25 per cent, Agriculture mobile app and smart phone 97.03 per cent, You tube 96.29 per cent, Facebook 88.88 per cent, Wikipedia 78.51 per cent, Web portal 60.74 per cent, Instagram 54.07 per cent, e-learning 36.29 per cent, mobile SMS service 31.11 per cent, Twitter 25.92 per cent, Computer 11.82 per cent, Blog 10.37 per cent, Laptop 5.92 per cent, Video-conferencing 1.48 per cent, Information Kiosk machine and e-mail 0.74 per cent.

            The reason behind those needy farmers easy crop pest and diseases control information is available on digital platforms like television, Whatsapp, agricultural mobile app, You tube, Facebook, etc.

CONCLUSIONS

            The results of present study shows that majority of farmer middle age category, majority of farmer were educated up to secondary school level, majority farmers possessed marginal land holding, majority of farmer were medium farming experience, majority of farmer were medium level of possession of DCT tools, majority of farmer were medium level of annual income, majority of farmer were not attended any training, majority of farmer were medium extension contact, majority of farmer were medium level of innovativeness, majority of farmer were medium level of risk orientation, majority of farmer were medium level of scientific orientation, majority of farmer were medium level of economic orientation, majority of farmer were medium awareness about Digital and Communication Technology (DCT). The extent of use of Digital and Communication Technologies (DCT) tools by the farmers i.e. 60.00 per cent were using DCT tools medium extent, followed by low extent 20.74 per cent and rest high extent 19.26 per cent. The transfer of agricultural technology is depends on the communication media and the Digital and Communication Technologies (DCTs) tools. Smart phone,Smartphonee Mobile App, Whatsapp, You tube, Facebook, television considered as best meantheof communication as well as tandtransfer. The Digital and communication Technologies (DCT) tools for various purposes which utilized by the farmers. Farmers most prefer the topp, agricultural mobile app, smart phone, Facebook, You tube, etc. which is commonly used for all purposes.

Get the all tables here…

REFERENCES

1. Anonymous, 2014. SMEs and digital communication techniques: a qualitative market research report prepared for the ACMA by Gfk Australia. Australian Communications and Media Authority Australian Communication and Media Authority.
2. Anonymous, 2019-B. Internet users in India to reach 627 million in 2019, retrieved from htteps://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/internet/internetusersinindiatoreach27-million-in-2019-report/articleshow/68288868.cms on 18.04.2019.
3. Devaraj and Ravichandran, P. 2014. A Study on the role of information and mass media communication technology among farming community of Mandya District, Karnataka State. Journal of Advances in Library and Information Science, 3(1): 43-46.
4. Giridhar, K. A., Devendrappa, S. and M. P. Potdar. 2019. A detailed study of profile of famers using mobile phones services. Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry, 8(6): 461-465.
5. Naik, B. Jasawanth. 2018. A Study on ICT Tools Usage by the Farmers in Anatapur District of Andhra Pradesh. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, Acharya N. G. Ranga Agricultural University, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh.
6. Panda, S., S. Modak, L. Devi, L. Das, P. K. Pal and M. S. Nain. 2019. Access and Usage of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) to Accelerate Farmers Income. Journal of Community Mobilization and Sustainable Development, 14(1): 200-205.
7. Thangjam B. and K. K. Jha. 2019. Socio-Economic Correlates and Information Sources utilization by Paddy farmers in bishnupur District, Manipur. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci, 8(10): 1652-1659.
8. Tomar, A., Bhardwaj, N., Verma, A.P and Sawant, M. N. 2016. Association between Socio Demographic Profile and Extent of Use of ICT among Farmers, International Journal of Agricultural Science and Research, 6(6): 163-168.
9. Verma, A. P., Ansari, M. A., Rajan, R., Archana, B., Rupan, R and Diksha, P. 2016. Farmers Attitude towards e-choupal: A Critical Investigation in Gonda District of Uttar Pradesh, International Journal of Agriculture Sciences, 8(49): 2076-2078.
10. Czapiewski, K. Ł., Kulikowski, R., Bański, J., Bednarek-Szczepańska, M., Mazur, M., Ferenc, M., & Konopski, M. (2013). The use of ICT in Mazovian agriculture. Rural Areas and Development, 10.
11. Chilimo, W. L. (2008). Information and communication technologies and sustainable livelihoods: a case of selected rural areas of Tanzania (Doctoral dissertation).
12. Ahmed, E. R., Rahim, N. F. A., Alabdullah, T. T. Y., & Thottoli, M. M. (2019).Examiningf social media role in entrepreneurial intention among accounting students: a SEM study. Journal of Modern Accounting and Auditing, 15(12), 577-589.
13. Albright, L. D. (1990). Environment control for animals and plants. American Society of Agricultural Engineers.
14. Hu, X., Sun, L., Zhou, Y., & Ruan, J. (2020). Review of operational management in intelligent agriculture based on the Internet of Things. Frontiers of Engineering Management, 7(3), 309-322.
15. Zakota, Z. (2011). Knowledge management for rural development. Managerial Challenges of the Contemporary Society, (2), 337-341.
16. Dahlman, C., Mealy, S., & Wermelinger, M. (2016). Harnessing the digital economy for developing countries.
17. Moysiadis, H., Zotos, N., Kardaris, M., Bogdos, G., Stergiopoulos, C., Anastasopoulos, K., & Mavropoulos, K. (2017). Combining FIWARE and IoT technologies for smart, small-scale farming: the case of QUHOMA platform architecture. Cloud and Fog Computing in 5G Mobile Networks: Emerging Advances and Applications, 70, 239.
18. Haldorai, A., Ramu, A., & Murugan, S. (2019). Smart sensor networking and green technologies in urban areas. In Computing and communication systems in urban development (pp. 205-224). Springer, Cham.
19. Tripoli, M., & Schmidhuber, J. (2018). Emerging Opportunities for the Application of Blockchain in the Agri-food Industry. FAO and ICTSD: Rome and Geneva. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA, 3.
20. Ferris, S., Robbins, P., Best, R., Seville, D., Buxton, A., Shriver, J., & Wei, E. (2014). Linking smallholder farmers to markets and the implications for extension and advisory services. MEAS Brief, 4(10), 13-14.
21. Arunachalam, S. (2004). Information and communication technologies and poverty alleviation. Current Science, 960-966.
22. Balogun, N. A., Ehikhamenor, F. A., Mejabi, O. V., Oyekunle, R. A., Bello, O. W., & Afolayan, O. T. (2020). Exploring information and communication technology among rural dwellers in sub-Saharan African communities. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 12(5), 533-545.
23. Kumar, N., & Chadha, A. (2002). Exploiting the potential of information and communication technologies for development in South Asia. South Asian Survey, 9(2), 201-218.
24. Lipper, L., Thornton, P., Campbell, B. M., Baedeker, T., Braimoh, A., Bwalya, M., … & Torquebiau, E. F. (2014). Climate-smart agriculture for food security. Nature climate change, 4(12), 1068-1072.
25. Gondchawar, N., & Kawitkar, R. S. (2016). IoT based smart agriculture. International Journal of advanced research in Computer and Communication Engineering, 5(6), 838-842.
26. Prathibha, S. R., Hongal, A., & Jyothi, M. P. (2017, March). IoT based monitoring system in smart agriculture. In 2017 international conference on recent advances in electronics and communication technology (ICRAECT) (pp. 81-84). IEEE.
27. Patil, K. A., & Kale, N. R. (2016, December). A model for smart agriculture using IoT. In 2016 International Conference on Global Trends in Signal Processing, Information Computing and Communication (ICGTSPICC) (pp. 543-545). IEEE.