158 INDIAN JOURNAL OF EXTENSION EDUCATION

Indian Journal of Extension Education

Vol.47, No. 3 & 4, 2011 (158-163)

Assessing Knowledge and Adoption of Fish Farmers about Fish Production

Technology in Madhya Pradesh
Parvez Rajan1, M.K. Dubey2, Sonam Agrawal3 and Sandeep Chauhan4

ABSTRACT
Fishery plays a very important role in the socio-economic development of nation through employment
generation, contribution to food security and foreign exchange. The present study was undertaken to assess
the knowledge level and adoption of fish farmers about fish production technology. The study was conducted
with 90 fish farmers randomly selected in 3 villages of Jabalpur district, which were results showed that. Fish
farmers in Jabalpur were of comparatively young age group, education up to high school, low annual income,
common pond for fish farming, minimum experience of 15 years, fish farming + singhara cultivation as their
main occupation, low attitude towards fish farming, medium market orientation, high scientific orientation, low
aspiration level, low use of information sources and training exposure. The knowledge level and adoption of
fish farmers about recommended fish practices was medium. It was also observed that there was considerable
variation in their knowledge and adoption on different aspects.

Fish is an excellent source of energy, as it provides production. The fishery industry is crucial to the World
1000-2000 kcal/kg. Moderately active females (19–30 economy. The livelihoods of millions of people worldwide
years old) need 1500–2500 kcal/day, while males of the are dependent on fish farming (Nwachukwu Ike, 2005).
same age need 2500–3300 kcal/day. Generally, fish diets
According to S Ayyapan of Indian Council of
tend to be highly rich in protein. Protein requirement
Agricultural Research, India is home to more than 10 %
levels in children diets often approach or exceed 40%
of global fish biodiversity with 2200 species of fish and
crude protein, while that for adults diets may contain 25-
35% protein. Fish in diet provides 15-25% protein. India shellfish in the marine and inland waters. “With water
is the sixth largest producer (5477 mt.) of fish. The total resources in terms of 29,000 km of rivers, 3.15 million
world fish production is 130882 mt., India is the second hectares of reservoirs, 2.35 million hectares of ponds
largest producer in the world of inland fish production, and tanks and 0.2 million hectares of floodplain wetlands,
next to China, (Sharma 2006). Indian fisheries have made the potential production levels are estimated at over 4.5
great strides during last five decades with an annual mmt annually,” Mr Ayyapan said. With fish becoming a
popular diet component, aquaculture should be promoted
production of 6.4 million tons in 2005-2006. The present
with a view of achieving nutritional secrity and generating
senerio of fish productivity in Madhya Pradesh is 1348
further employment opportunities. (About TheFish
kg/ha comparatively lesser than the national productivity
Site.com). Keeping the view in mind the present study
of 2186 kg/ha.The total water area in MP is 3.44 lakh
was formulated to assess the knowledge and adoption of
ha, of which 3.24 lakh ha comes under fish production.
different fish production practices.
In Jabalpur district there are 701 tanks/ponds, with an
area of 8684 ha, and annual production of 2356 tons. There are two types of ownership of these ponds
in panagar block i.e. Panchayat (leased) and individually
India is second in inland fish production, it is
owned (own) Panchayat Ponds constitutes more than
therefore necessary to ensure that improved fish
80% of the water area. The preparation of any
production technologies that have been developed and
development strategy means information about the existing
disseminated are adopted, in order to increase fish
1
Ph.D scholar, 2Associate Professor, 3M.Sc scholar & 4M.Sc scholar, Deptt of Extension Education, College of agriculture, JNKVV, Jabalpur.
 ASSESSING KNOWLEDGE AND ADOPTION OF FISH FARMERS ABOUT FISH PRODUCTION 159

level of knowledge of the target group. Thus, the present village was prepared with the help of fishery department
study was conducted to assess the knowledge and and out of which 30 equal number of fish farmers from
adoption of the fish farmers regarding fish production each selected villages was selected randomly, thus the
technology (Sharma and Laharia 2006). total 90 fish farmers was the sample size of the study.
METHODOLOGY Measurement of knowledge level
The study was conducted in Jabalpur district of The knowledge was operationalized as the
Madhya Pradesh state in 2011, as the district has covered information possessed by the fish farmers about the
large area under fish farming than the other district of recommended practices for fishery production. The
M.P. and average yield of fish production of the district existing profile, knowledge level and adoption were
is lower than the national average yield. The Jabalpur measured through a schedule prepared on the basis of
district comprises of seven blocks out of which only package of practices of fish production technology
Panagar block was selected because this block covered recommended by Department of Fishery, Government of
large area under fish farming as compared to other blocks. Madhya Pradesh. Major technological aspects such as
The Panagar block comprises of 218 villages, but only 10 pond management, selection of seed and management,
villages suitable for fish farming as per the record of feed and fertilizer management, unwanted fishes and weed
fishery department out of them 3 villages i.e. Budhagar, management, fish protection management, harvesting and
Gosalpur, and Chhatarpur were selected due to maximum storage management. The response on 26 items was
area of these villages were covered under fish farming. obtained on 2 point continuum i.e. yes and no and scores
A comprehensive list of fish farmers of each selected of 1 and 0 were assigned, respectively. The farmers
were categories into low, medium and high knowledge.

Table 1: Profile of fish farmers

S. No. Categories N= 90
Frequency Percentage
1. Age Young age group (20-35 years) 53 58.88
Middle age group (36-50 yrs) 27 30.00
Old age group (51 & above) 10 11.12
2. Education Illiterate 18 20.00
Up to primary school 13 14.44
Up to middle school 24 26.67
High school and above 35 38.89
3. Annual income Low income Rs 5000-12000 /- 48 53.34
Medium income Rs 12001-19000 /- 12 13.33
High income Rs 19001/- & above 30 33.33
4. Area covered under Owned pond 17 18.89
fish farming Common pond 73 81.11
5. Experience Low experience (10 - 20 years) 47 52.22
Medium experience (21 - 30 years) 30 33.33
High experience (31 years & above) 13 14.45
6. Occupation Fish farming 09 10.00
Fish farming + Singhara cultivation 46 51.12
Fish farming + Singhara cultivation +Labour 35 38.88
7. Attitude towards Low (2 - 5) 58 64.45
fish farming Medium (6 - 8) 21 23.34
High (9 & above) 11 12.21
8. Market Orientation Low (1 - 2) 25 27.78
Medium (3 - 4) 45 50.00
High (5 & above) 20 22.22
160 INDIAN JOURNAL OF EXTENSION EDUCATION

9.Scientific Orientation Low (Up to 12 scores) 0 0.00

Medium (13 to 24 scores) 16 17.78
High (25 and above scores) 74 82.22
10. Aspiration level Low (10 – 13) 54 60.00
Medium (14 – 16) 30 33.34
High (17 & above) 06 6.66
11.Use of information sources Low (3 – 6) 57 63.34
Medium (7 – 9) 22 24.45
High (10 & above) 11 12.21
12.Training exposure Low (Up to 2 Trainings) 57 63.34
Medium (3 - 4 Trainings) 03 3.34
High (5 - 6 Trainings) 30 33.32

Distribution of fish farmers according to their Knowledge of fish production technology.

Aspect-wise knowledge level of fish farmers about
different fishery practices

The data in the graph indicates that out of the total

fish farmers, highest percentage i.e. 48.89 per cent was The perusal of data in graph reveals that the mean
found in medium knowledge category, whereas 32.22 knowledge score of fish farmers 4.02. The Graph further
per cent in high and 18.89 per cent in low knowledge shows that the important technological aspect was pond
categories. management, feed and fertilizer management, selection
of seed and management, while the less important
Thus, it can be concluded that the higher (48.89%) technological aspect was unwanted fishes and weed
of the fish farmers had medium level of knowledge of management, fish protection management, harvesting and
fish production technology. storage management (Nagarajaih,2005), (Tiwari,2007).
Table 2. Distribution of fish farmers according to their adoption level of fish production technology.
S. No. Categories No. of fish farmers Percentage
1. Low Adoption (Up to 19 scores) 14 15.55
2. Medium Adoption (20 to 22 scores) 50 55.55
3. High Adoption (23 and above) 26 28.90
Total 90 100.00

The data in the Table 2 indicates that out of the Thus, it can be concluded that the higher (55.55%)
total fish farmers, highest percentage i.e. 55.55 per cent of the fish farmers had medium level of adoption of fish
was found in medium adoption category, whereas 28.90 production technology (Talukdar, 2005).
per cent in high and 15.55 per cent in low adoption
categories.
 ASSESSING KNOWLEDGE AND ADOPTION OF FISH FARMERS ABOUT FISH PRODUCTION 161

Table 3. Aspect-wise adoption level of fish farmers about different fishery practices
S.No. Aspect Mean Rank
1 Pond management 5.33 I
2 Selection of seed and management 3.85 III
3 Feed and fertilizer management 3.93 II
4 Unwanted fishes and weed management 2.83 V
5 Fish protection management 2.04 VI
6 Harvesting and storage management 3.64 IV
Overall mean (X ) 3.60

Aspect-wise adoption level of fish farmers about was pond management, feed and fertilizer management,
different fishery practices selection of seed and management, while the less
important technological aspect was unwanted fishes and
The perusal of data in Table 3 reveals that the
weed management, fish protection management,
mean adoption score of fish farmers 3.60. The Table
harvesting and storage management.
further shows that the important technological aspect

Table 4. Association between independent variables with their knowledge level and adoption.
S. No. Variables Knowledge Adoption
x2 Degree of x2 Degree of
freedom freedom
1. Age 15.337** 2 13.861** 2
2. Education 10.181* 3 9.483* 3
3. Annual income through fish farming 17.590** 2 9.662** 2
4. Area covered under fish farming 3.159 NS 2 4.433 NS 2
5. Experience of fish farming 10.467** 2 7.465* 2
6. Occupation 2.339* 2 9.307** 2
7. Attitude towards fish farming 16.636** 2 7.917* 2
8. Marketing orientation 9.910* 4 10.090** 2
9. Scientific orientation 6.185** 2 8.531* 2
10. Aspiration Level 11.012** 2 7.440* 2
11. Use of information sources 10.067** 2 6.577* 2
12. Training exposure 11.674** 2 13.861** 2
*** Significant at 0.05 and 0.01 level of probability, NS, Non-significant

Association between profile of fish farmers and their Constraints in fish production technology.
knowledge level
Constraints are the forcible restrictions and
It is seen from Table 4 that all the variables except confinement of action, for implementation of any technical
area, have significant positive association with the overall strategies, the constraints plays very important role.
knowledge level and adoption. It suggest that in general, Therefore, to obtain better result it is very essential to
the farmers knowledge and adoption increases with the find out the constraints and to minimize the same in
increase in their education level, experience, attitude implementation and adoption of fish production technology
towards fish farming, scientific orientation, use of as far as possible.
information sources, training exposure.
162 INDIAN JOURNAL OF EXTENSION EDUCATION

Table 5. Constraints in fish production technology reported by fish farmers.

S.No. Constraints Respondents N = 90
Frequ-ency % Rank
A Economic constraints
i Lack of money to purchase useful fishery inputs 69 76.66 VII
ii Lack of money for pond cleaning 90 100.00 I(c)
Iii High cost of seeds (fry and fingerlings). 80 88.88 III
iv High labour charges 45 50.00 XIII
B Technical constraints
i Lack of informations about fishery programmes and insurance policies 51 56.66 XI
Ii Lack of knowledge about production technology. 75 83.33 V
iii Lack of knowledge about insects and diseases of fish 44 48.88 XIV
iv Lack of knowledge of integrated fish farming 55 61.11 X
v Lack of knowledge about soil and water testing 32 35.55 XV
C Extension constraints
i Lack of technical guidance from FEOs 50 55.55 XII
ii Lack of information available in local language 35 38.88 XIV
iii Irregular visit of FEOs, 77 85.55 IV
iv Lack of demonstration conducted by fishery department 70 77.77 VI
v Lack of trainings provided on fish production technology 65 72.22 VIII
D Institutional constraints
i Co-operative societies are not providing seeds timely 90 100.00 I(a)
ii Lack of fishery related technical information from Gram Panchayat 85 94.44 II
E Situational constraints :
i Water scarcity 90 100.00 I(b)
ii Low market price 60 66.66 IX

CONCLUSION Association between independent variables with

their knowledge and adoption, revealed that age, education,
The knowledge and adoption of various
annual income, experience, occupation, attitude towards
technological components, it was found that Pond
fish farming, marketing orientation, scientific orientation,
management, Feed and fertilizer management, Selection
aspiration level, use of information sources and training
of seed and management as important technological
exposure were positively related with knowledge of fish
components, While the less important technological
production technology but area were negatively related
components to the fish farmers were, Unwanted fishes
with knowledge and adoption of fish production
and weed management, Fish protection management,
technology.
Harvesting and storage management. Similarly,
Knowledge and Adoption of fish farmers was studied REFERENCES
regarding fish production technology. It was observed
Tewari .N.P, Pushmar Mishra and Shakila Khan (2007).
that higher percentage of fish farmers belonged to medium
‘’Knowledge of Composite Fish Culture Among
knowledge category. (Nagarajaih,2005). It was also
Fish Farmers of District Gorakhpur, U.P.’’ paper
observed that the higher percentage of fish farmers
published in Compendium brought out on 4th
belonged to medium adoption category (Talukdar, 2005).
National Extension Education Congress, March
 ASSESSING KNOWLEDGE AND ADOPTION OF FISH FARMERS ABOUT FISH PRODUCTION 163

09-11-2007 held at J.N.K.V.V Jabalpur. pp-118. Sharma Vikram, Dixit V.B. and Laharia S.N. (2005)
“Knowledge and Adoption of fish production
Sharma Vikram and Laharia S.N (2006) “Knowledge
Technology. Indian J. Extn. Edu., vol. 41. No.
Level of fish farmers About Fish production
1 & 2, pp. 113 – 116
Technology. Indian J. Extn. Edu., Vol. 42, No.
1 & 2. pp. 81 - 87. Nwachukwu Ike and Onuegbu Roseline (2005) “Adoption
of Aquaculture Technology by Fish Farmers in
Nagarajaiah. C. S., Biradar. R. S., Gouda. S., Ojha S. N.
Imo State of Nigeria” The Journal of
and Saleem S. S. (2005) “Influencing the
technology studies pp 57-64
knowledge level of the fish farmers in southern
Karnataka” Karnataka J. of Agri. Sci., Vol. 18 Talkudar. P. K. and Sontaki. B. S. (2005) “Correlates of
No. 2 pp. 415-421. adoption of composite fish culture practices by
fish farmers of Assam, India” J. Agri. Sci.,
Vol. I, No. 1 pp. 12-18.