See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/324843847

Management practice adoption and productivity of commercial aquaculture

farms in selected areas of Bangladesh

Article in Journal of the Bangladesh Agricultural University · April 2018

DOI: 10.3329/jbau.v16i1.36491

CITATIONS READS

48 738

2 authors:

Md. Masudul Haque Prodhan Md. Akhtaruzzaman Khan

Policy Research Institute of Bangladesh (PRI) Bangladesh Agricultural University
29 PUBLICATIONS 332 CITATIONS 137 PUBLICATIONS 1,708 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Md. Akhtaruzzaman Khan on 02 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

J Bangladesh Agril Univ 16(1): 111–116, 2018 doi: 10.3329/jbau.v16i1.36491

ISSN 1810-3030 (Print) 2408-8684 (Online)

Journal of Bangladesh Agricultural University
Journal home page: http://baures.bau.edu.bd/jbau, www.banglajol.info/index.php/JBAU

Management practice adoption and productivity of commercial aquaculture

farms in selected areas of Bangladesh
Md. Masudul Haque Prodhan and Md. Akhtaruzzaman Khan
Department of Agricultural Finance, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh-2202, Bangladesh
ARTICLE INFO Abstract
Adoption of scientific management practice is the pre-condition for increasing productivity in any farm
Article history: business. This study estimates the level of scientific aquaculture management practice (SAMP) adoption,
Received: 27 February 2018 factor affecting adoption and its relation with productivity. Sixty aquaculture farms were selected from 3
Accepted: 15 April 2018 upazilas of Mymensingh district of Bangladesh. Adoption level was measured by following Sengupta
Keywords: (1967) while Tobit regression was used to assess the determinants of adoption level. Polynomial
Management Practice Adoption, regression was employed to show the relationship among farm size, adoption level and productivity.
Productivity, Aquaculture, Result revealed that average SAMP adoption level was 54% where 53% farmers were medium adopter.
Bangladesh Training, experience, education and extension service had significant positive effect on level of adoption.
Productivity was significantly higher for those farmers who adopted more SAMP. Adoption level,
productivity and profitability of small farmers were higher than that of large farmers. The study suggests
Correspondence: farmers for adopting scientific management practices in order to increase the aquaculture productivity and
Md. Akhtaruzzaman Khan profitability.
([email protected])

Introduction
Aquaculture has expanded tremendously in Bangladesh There are few studies on technology and management
and achieved 5th position in the world accounting for practice adoption in the field of agriculture and
2.43% of the total global aquaculture production (MoF, aquaculture. Sreenivasa & Hiriyanna (2014) studied
2016). This sector plays a significant role for reducing factors influencing adoption in non-traditional Seri
protein deficiency and malnutrition, generating culture with respect to mulberry and silkworm rearing
employment and earnings foreign exchange. technologies and found that education, farming
Aquaculture productivity needs to be increased to fulfill experience and extension service significantly
the excess demand of growing population. But influenced the adoption of new technologies irrespective
productivity mainly depends on appropriate use of of holding size groups. Swathi et al. (2011) found that
different inputs and management practices. Feed is the adoption behavior was high in harvesting, conditioning,
main input of fish production which captures about 70% sterilization, liming and feed management in scientific
of total production cost (Khan et. al. 2017, Alam et. al. shrimp farms. Arora et al. (2009) observed stronger
2012, Alam 2011). Fertilizer is applied to raise the relation between adoption index and composite index of
phytoplankton in the pond. Good quality fingerling is infrastructure which emphasized the need for improving
another important input which moves-up the infrastructure to increase adoption of agricultural
productivity of aquaculture. Farmers should be very technologies. Like these studies, Karunathilaka &
cautious about the stocking density of fingerlings Thayaparan (2016), Gedikoglu (2010),Singh et al.
because over-populated ponds make aquaculture species (2014) and Ndambiri et al. (2008) also dealt with
susceptible to disease, less growth and death. Different adoption of improved technologies in different aspects
water cleaning measures like removal of sediment, water of agriculture and aquaculture. But adoption level of
exchange, salt and lime ensure good water quality which SAMP and its relationship with productivity is almost
reduces harmful gas, disease prevalence and mortality absent in Bangladesh. Therefore, this study bears prime
rate. Culture system such as monoculture and polyculture importance in assisting aquaculture farmers are
also affects the aquaculture productivity. Farmers of regarding necessity of adopting SAMP in their
developed countries follow the rules of scientific operation. The specific objectives of the study are: (i) to
aquaculture management practices (SAMP) while estimate the level of SAMP adoption and identifying
farmers of developing countries are not capable to utilize factors affecting adoption, (ii) to assess the relationship
all the management practices. Available information, among adoption level, farm size and productivity in
access to information, necessary extension service and aquaculture farming.
training are very important for adopting the SAMP.
Furthermore, adoption of SAMP may be affected by
different socioeconomic characteristics of the producers.
Management Practice Adoption of Aquaculture
Materials and Methods Again, the adoption quotient/level was classified as high
adopters (66.67% to 100%), medium adopters (33.34%
The study was based on the primary data collected from to 66.66 %) low adopters (up to 33.33 %) and non-
60 aquaculture farms located in 3 major aquaculture adopters (0).
producing upazilas (Trishal, Fulpur and Tarakanda) of
Mymensingh district of Bangladesh. Pangas and tilapia
In addition, Tobit model was used to identify the factors
were dominating species which contributes more than
affecting adoption level of SAMP. Hence adoption level
40% of total aquaculture production in the study area.
ranged from 27.77 to 88.89 therefore, Tobit model was a
Therefore, pangas farm was chosen with mono and
polyculture system. The farms were selected by using better choice for this data set. The empirical Tobit
stratified random sampling technique from the lists regression model was as follows:
provided by Upazila Fisheries Officer (UFO) and data Y = α 0 + β1X1 + β 2 X 2 + β 2 X 2 + β 4 X 4 + β 5 X 5 +
were collected following face to face interview with pre-
tested questionnaire in 2015. Fifteen aquaculture β6X6 + β7X7 + e
management practices were considered as presented in
Table 1. These management practices were coded as ‘1’ Where; Y= level of adoption; α 0 = intercept; β=
for the response “who use less than the recommended
dose”, ‘2’ for “who use more than recommended dose” coefficient; X1 = age (year); X 2 = education (years of
and ‘3’ for “who use same as recommended dose”. schooling); X 3 = family size (number); X 4 = experience
Some management practices like weed control, dyke
rising, species combination (surface, mid and bottom), (years); X 5 = training (dummy; 1= if training has
feeding as per body weight, water quality test and received and 0=otherwise); X 6 =farm distance from
maintain record book were coded as‘1’ for the positive
response and ‘0’ for the negative response. home (km); X 7 = extension services (dummy; 1= if
extension service has received and 0= otherwise) and e =
Table 1. Management practices to determine the level error term.
of adoption Furthermore, polynomial regression model was
Management practices Recommended employed to show the relationship between farm size,
dose productivity and adoption level. Theoretical polynomial
Removal of sediment per month(times) 1 regression smoothing model can be describe as:
Liming (gm/decimal) 1000 Consider a set of scatter plot data {(x1, y1), . . . ,(xn, yn)}
Cow dung (kg/decimal) 5000-10000 from the model
Urea (gm/decimal) 100-150
TSP (gm/decimal) 50-75
for some unknown mean and variance functions m(·) and
Fingerling stocking density (per decimal) 175-195
Fingerling size (inch) 4-8 σ2 (·), and symmetric errors with E( ) = 0 and
Feeding (times/day) 2 Var( ) = 1. The goal is to estimate m(x0) = E[Y |X =
Water exchange (frequency per year) 1 to 2 x0], making no assumption about the functional form of
m (·).
Weed control (dummy) Yes=1, No=0
Dyke rising (dummy) Yes=1, No=0
Species combination (dummy, 1 if they Yes=1, No=0
Results and Discussion
follows species combination on the basis
of water depth, 0 otherwise) Socio-economic characteristics of farmers
Feeding as per body weight (dummy) Yes=1, No=0 Farmers’ adoption of SAMP was highly influenced by
Test water quality (dummy) Yes=1, No=0 socio-economic status which changes over time (Olaoye
Maintain record book (dummy) Yes=1, No=0
et al. 2016). Study found that the mean age of farmers
was 38 years while their level of education was 8 years
Source: BFRI, 2014 (Table 2). In addition, experience in aquaculture farming
found on an average 3.52 years. Alam, (2011) found the
The obtained responses from above management similar mean education and age of pangas farmers in
practices were considered as individual adoption score Bangladesh but mean experience of farmers was much
and were used for calculating the adoption level higher than the study. Average family size found 4.97
following Sengupta(1967) as follows: which is greater than national average (BBS, 2016).
Adoption quotient or level = Although dependent members was more in the large
family, but they worked as family labor in aquaculture
Total score obtained by farmer ponds and thus reduce labor cost as well as enhance
× 100
Maximum score productivity.

112
 Prodhan and Khan
Table 2. Descriptive statistics of socio-economic Labor was the second highest cost that captured 11.05%
characteristics of aquaculture farmers of total production cost. This input was essential for
Variables Mean SD Minimum Maximum maintaining all SAMPs. Fingerling captured 5.29% of
Area of farm (decimal) 201 162 40 750 total cost. Per hectare productivity of aquaculture was
Age (years) 38.1 7.053 27 51 found about 33642 kg and this finding is consistent with
Education (years) 8.13 3.27 3 16 the studies of Khan et al. (2017), Alam (2011), Ali et al.
Experience (years) 3.52 1.93 1 10 (2013) and Ali & Haque (2011). Result showed that net
Family size (number) 4.97 1.22 2 8 return or profit from per hectare of pond area was about
Training (dummy,% of 30 - 0 1 Tk 886522 and the BCR was1.39. It implies that farmers
positive response) can earn profit Tk. 0.39 by investing Tk. 1 which
Farm distance (km) 1.35 1.06 0.25 6
indicates aquaculture was a profitable business in the
Extension service 10 - 0 1
(dummy, % of positive
study area. Ajiboye et al. (2011) and Thompson &
response) Mafimisebi (2014) found the identical result in their
analyses.
Source: Field Survey, 2015
About 30% farmers received training on aquaculture Level of management practice adoption
production whereas only 10% received extension Adoption level for an individual farmer was computed
facilities. Generally, Department of Fisheries (DoF) or from the adoption scores gained by the farmer. Result
other related international and national research reveals that 23.33% farmers were high adopter while
organization provides training on aquaculture. 53.33% were medium adopter. Result also showed that
Participation in this aquaculture training mainly depends average adoption level is 54% which lied in the medium
on farmers’ communication with training organization. level (33.34% to 66.66%). Percentage of high adopted
Therefore, comparatively large farmers those have good farms was low because of less adoption of different
communication with these organizations takes scientific management practices. Among these practices,
opportunity to participate in the training program. farmers were struggling to follow timely feed
application because most of the farmers were not always
Profitability of aquaculture able to afford the cost of the feed. This situation arisen
Profitability analysis shows the financial situation of due to change in feed price. This result consistent with
aquaculture farms whether farming is economically the study of Gawde et al. (2006).
feasible or not. Result found that per hectare total cost of
aquaculture was Tk. 2250358. Feed was the single Table 4. Adoption level of aquaculture management
largest cost item which consisted about 77.77% of total practice
cost while Khan (2012) and Alam (2011) found that feed % of Obtained
Adoption level category
occupied 71% and 70% respectively. Although feed was farmers level
the main input for aquaculture but its cost is increasing No adopters (0) 0.00 0.00
year by year due to rising price of different raw Low adopter (up toto 33.33) 23.33 31.15
materials. Medium adopter (33.34% to 66.66%) 53.33 54.60
High adopter (66.67% to 100%) 23.33 76.98
Table 3. Cost-benefit analysis of commercial Average 54.35
aquaculture farming (per hectare) Source: Field Survey, 2015
Item Quantity Cost/return % of Factors affecting adoption of aquaculture
(Tk) costs management practices
Cost Adoption level of aquaculture management practices
Labor (man-day) 897 248717 11.05 may depend on socioeconomic characteristics of the
Fingerlings (no.) 43733 119148 5.29
producers.
Feed (kg) 63881 1727785 76.77
Urea (kg) 21 400 0.01 Table 5. Tobit regression for factors affecting
TSP (kg) 4 164 0.007 adoption of scientific aquaculture
Cow-dung (kg) 744 232 0.01 management practices
Lime (kg) 366 6483 0.28
Pesticide (Tk) 5883 0.26 Adoption Coefficient Standard error P-value
Miscellaneous cost (Tk) 83501 3.71 Constant 34.89 13.94 0.01
Total variable cost (Tk) 2192313 97.43 Age -0.14 0.23 0.54
Total fixed cost (Tk) 58045 2.57 Education 1.28** 0.59 0.03
Total cost (Tk) 2250358 100 Family size 0.95 1.63 0.55
Return Experience 1.84** 0.91 0.04
Total harvest (kg/ hectare) 33642 Training 10.17*** 4.14 0.01
Gross return (Tk/hectare) 3136880 Farm distance -2.86** 1.42 0.05
Gross Margin (Tk/hectare) 944567 Extension service 8.64* 4.61 0.06
Net return (Tk/hectare) 886522 Lr chi2 58.22
BCR (total return/total cost) 1.39 Prob>chi2 0.00
Source: Field Survey, 2015 Significance level: *** for 1%, ** for 5% and * for 10%
113
Management Practice Adoption of Aquaculture
Education was found significant positive effect on
adoption level i.e. highly educated farmers were more
adopter compared to the less educated (Table 5).
Usually, educated farmers participate in different
seminars, symposiums and workshops and thus can
recognize different aspects of SAMP. CIMMYT (1993) t = 4.69
also carried out a research and found similar result.
Training shows significant positive effect on adoption
implying that farmer who received training was more
adopter compared to non-receiver. Farmers can learn
different management techniques from training Figure 1. Relationship between farm size and adoption level
programs provided by government and different NGOs. Relationship between farm size and productivity
Sakiband Afrad (2014), Njankoua et al. (2012), The relationship between farm size and land productivity
Bucciarelli et al. (2010), Kashem (2005), Tziraki et al. has been widely debated and several reasons and
(2000) and Hussain et al. (1994) got similar result for explanations for the inverse relationship had been put
education and training. Besides, positive and significant forward and tested. Imperfect factor market was the
coefficient of extension services implies that the farmers main issue for the debate. Local polynomial regression
those had better communication with extension services in Figure 2 revealed the inverse relationship between
providers were higher adopter. Especially, extension farm size and productivity. The probable reason might
agent, technician and resource person provided be the small farmers can easily supervise their farms.
necessary suggestions on different management They got a relative advantage of using more family labor
that reduce the monitoring and supervision costs of hired
practices and those services enhanced aquaculture
labor with respect to the large farms (Thapa, 2007). In
productivity. Ragasa et al. (2013) and Perey (2016)
addition, large farms were overusing fertilizer,
identified the positive relation between adoption level
pesticides, etc. which led to the degradation of their
and extension services. Experience of aquaculture natural resource that causes less productivity (Sial et al.,
farmers also had positive significant effect on adoption 2012). In developing countries, this inverse relation was
level. Generally, experienced farmer have vast found by Desiere (2016), Gaurav & Mishra (2014),
knowledge about the management practices due to Bhalla & Roy (1988), Feder (1985) and Fan & Chan-
learning by doing. Distance from farm to residence had Kang (2003). Nevertheless, Sadhu & Singh (1996) found
negatively significant effect on adoption level implied positive relation between farm size and productivity.
that the higher distance, the lower the adoption. If the
40000

farm is situated in distant places, it becomes difficult to

manage. Normally, farmers apply feed in the pond two
Productivity(Kg/hectare)
30000

times in a day. When it is far from home, it was difficult

for them to provide feed timely. Moreover, they cannot
20000

apply medicines in their pond at the time of disease

t= 4.28
prevalence. Hailu et al. (2014) found the identical result
10000

on the effect of distance on adoption level. 0 200 400

Farm size (decimal)
600 800

95% CI Fitted values

Relationship between farm size and adoption level

Local polynomial regression showed that farm size and Figure 2. Relationship between farm size and productivity
adoption level was inversely related. i.e. adoption level
Relationship between adoption level and productivity
decrease with increase in farm size (Figure 1). More
There is no doubt that management practices was linked
labor and capital was needed to maintain the large farm.
to the productivity. A lot of technologies has been
But credit constraint was one of the main problems for
introduced by research institutes under the Government
large aquaculture farm for maintaining the appropriate of Bangladesh and other related organizations which
input application. As discussed earlier, feed was the concerned with innovations. Theory tells that innovative
main input and occupied two third of the total management practices affect the productivity in the
production cost, therefore large farmer couldn’t apply aquaculture sector. Local polynomial regression depicts
appropriate amount of feed during culture period. On the a positive relationship between adoption level and
other hand, more labor was need for application of input productivity implying that productivity was significantly
and other management of farm, especially for security higher for those farmers who adopted SAMP (Figure 3).
purpose. But large farmers were not able to adopt in Ahmed (2015) found similar result in the case of maize
scientific way due to scarcity of labor. This result was production. Gray & Shadbegian (1998), Thapa (2007),
consistent with Andrei (2011), Ureta et al. (2006) and Belay et al. (2014), Moreno and Surinach (2014), Asfaw
Just & Zilberman, (1983). & Shiferaw (2010) also found that productivity of high
adopters were greater than that of less adopter.

114
 Prodhan and Khan
leaflet on SAMP and production system. In addition,

60000
training on scientific aquaculture production system and
50000
Productivity (Kg/hectare) extension services needs to expand all over the country.
40000

Acknowledgment
Authors acknowledged their thanks to the BANGFISH
30000

t=4.14 project (‘Upgrading pangas and tilapia value chains in

Bangladesh’ which is funded by DANIDA) for funding
20000

20 40 60
Adoption quitent
80 100 the research and also the aquaculture farmers of
95% CI Fitted values Mymensingh district for sharing information and
providing valuable inputs. The authors are grateful to the
Figure 3. Relationship between adoption level and productivity anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments
and suggestions to improve the paper.
A summary of the results depicted in Table 6. It reveals Reference
that productivity, total return and profit of high adopter Adeshinwa, A.O.K. and Bolorunduro, P.I.2007. Existing fisheries
farmers were higher than others. Farm size of high technologies and approaches for dissemination in two
adopters was small and was more productive and maritime States of Nigeria: Effectiveness and constraints.
American-Eurasian J. Agric& Environ. Sci., 2 (3): 231–239.
profitable. In addition, BCR was found more in case of Ahmed, M.H. 2015. Adoption of multiple agricultural technologies in
high adopter compared to others. Overall, the result maize production of the Central Rift Valley of Ethiopia.
indicated that SAMP has enhanced the productivity and Agricultural Economics., 117: 162–168.
profitability in aquaculture. Ansah (2014), Adeshinwa & Ajiboye., John, A., Awoyemi. and Timothy, T. 2011. Analysis of
Profitability of Fish Farming Among Women in Osun
Bolorunduro (2007) and Thompson & Mafimisci (2014) State, Nigeria. Journal of Economics and Sustainable
found that adoption level, farm size and productivity Development., 2(4): 2222–2855.
were affected by each other. Alam, F.2011. Measuring technical: Allocative and cost efficiency of
pangas (Pangasius hypothalamus: Sauvage 1878) fish
farmers of Bangladesh. Aquaculture., 42: 1487–1500.
Table 6. Summary statistics of adoption level, farm Ali, H., Haque, M.M. and Belton, B. 2013. Striped catfish (P.
size, productivity and profitability hypophthalmus) aquaculture in Bangladesh: an overview.
Aquaculture research.,44. 950–965.
Item Low adopter Medium adopter High adopter Ali, H. and Haque, M. M. 2011. Impacts of Pangasius aquaculture on
Area (decimal) 270 186.87 164.28 land use patterns in Mymensingh district of Bangladesh. J.
Yield (kg/ha) 33754 32548 36034 Bangladesh Agril. Univ. 9(1): 169–178.
Total return (Tk) 3059138 3047368 3419223 Andrei, P. 2011.Agricultural Technology Adoption: Issues for
Profit (Tk) 782550 810739 1163691 Consideration When Scaling-Up. The Cornell Policy
Review. Journal of the Cornell Institute for Public
BCR 1.34 1.36 1.51
Affairs.,1.
Source: Field Survey, 2015 Ansah, Y.B. 2014. Enhancing Profitability of Pond Aquaculture in
Ghana through Resource Management and Environmental
Best Management Practices. Doctor of Philosophy in
Conclusion and policy recommendation Fisheries and Wildlife, October 30, www.researchgate.net
Adoption of SAMP is essential for increasing the Asfaw, S. and Shiferaw, B. 2010. Agricultural technology adoption
productivity of any farm business. This study tried to and rural poverty: Application of an endogenous switching
regression for selected East African Countries. Poster
estimates the level of adoption of scientific aquaculture Presented at the Joint 3rd African Association of
management practices, factors affecting adoption and its Agricultural Economists (AAAE) and 48th Agricultural
relation with farm size and productivity. For this Economists Association of South Africa (AEASA)
purpose, 60 aquaculture farms were selected from Conference, Cape Town. New Economics Papers., 97049.
Arora, A., Rajni, J. and Raju, S.S. 2009. A Novel Adoption Index of
Mymensingh district of Bangladesh. Aquaculture Selected Agricultural Technologies: Linkages with
farming was found profitable in the study area. In terms Infrastructure and Productivity. Agricultural Economics
of adoption, average adoption level of SAMP was about Research Review.,22(1): 109–120.
54% while 53% farmers were medium adopter. Training, BBS, Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, Government of the people’s
republic of Bangladesh, 2016
experience, education and extension service had Belay, A.M., Kasie, F.M., Helo, P., Takala, J. and Powell, D.J. 2014.
significant positive effect on adoption level while farm Adoption of quality management practices: An
distance from home and age of the aquaculture fish investigation of its relationship with labor productivity for
farmers had negative effect. Adoption level and farm labor intensive manufacturing companies. Benchmarking:
An International Journal., 21 (1): 21–24.
size were inversely associated implying that small BFRI. 2014. Leaflet on aquaculture production, Bangladesh Fisheries
farmers were relatively higher adopter compared to Research Institute, Government of the people’s republic of
larger ones. High adoption level was positively related Bangladesh.
with productivity and profitability of aquaculture Bhalla, S.S., and Roy, P. 1988. Mis-Specification in Farm Productivity
Analysis: the Role of Land Quality. Oxford Economic
farming. In order to enhance the aquaculture Papers., 40 (1): 55–73.
productivity, farmers are suggested to adopt scientific Bucciarelli, E., Odoardi, L. and Muratore, F. 2010. What role for
management practices. Department of Fisheries (DoF), education and training in technology adoption under an
Bangladesh Fisheries Research Institute (BFRI) and advanced socio-economic perspective? Procedia-Social
and Behavioral Sciences., 9: 573–578.
other related organizations can prepare and distribute
115
 Management Practice Adoption of Aquaculture
CIMMYT. 1993. The adoption of agricultural technology: A Guide for Ndambiri, H.K., Ritho, C.N. and Mbogoh, S.G. 2008. An evaluation of
survey design. CIMMYT Economic Programme, Mexico. farmers’ perceptions of and adaptation to the effects of
Desiere, S. 2016.The inverse productivity size relationship: can it be climate change in Kenya.International Journal of Food and
explained by systematic measurement error in self-reported Agricultural Economics., 1(1): 75–96.
production? Submission to the 5th International Conference Olaoye, OJ., Ezeri, G.N.O., Akegbejo-Samsons, Y., Awotunde,
of the African Association of Agricultural Economists J.M.and Ojebiyi, W.G. 2016. Dynamics of the adoption of
(ICAAAE), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, September 23–26. improved aquaculture technologies among fish farmers in
Fan, S., and Chan-Kang, C. 2003. Is small beautiful? Farm size, Lagos state, Nigeria. Croatian Journal of Fisheries., 74(2):
productivity, and poverty in Asian agriculture. Agricultural 56–70.
Economics. 32 (1): 135–146. Perey, E.R. 2016. Motivational Factors on the Adoption of Natural
Feder, G.1985. The Farm Size and Farm Productivity: the Role of Farming Technology research. Journal of Agriculture and
Family Labour, Supervision and Credit Constraints. Forestry Sciences., 4(1):14–19.
Journal of Development Economics.,18: 297–313. Ragasa, C., Berhane, G., Tadesse, F. and Taffesse, A.S.2013. Effects
Gaurav, S. and Mishra, S. 2014. Farm Size and Returns to Cultivation of Extension Services on Technology Adoption and
in India: Revisiting an Old Debate. Oxford Development Productivity among Female and Male Farmers. Summary of
Studies.,1–29. ESSP Working Paper 49, ESSP research note.
Gawde, M.M., Chandge, M.S.N. and Shirdhankar, M.M. 2006. Sadhu, A.N. and Singh, A. 1996. Farm size–productivity,
Adoption of improved aquaculture practices by shrimp Fundamentals of Agricultural Economics. Himalayan
farmers in south konkan region Maharashtra, India. Journal Publishing House. 186–211.
of Agriculture and Social Research (JASR)., 6(2). Sakib, M.H. and Afrad, M.S.I. 2014. Adoption of Modern Aquaculture
Gedikoglu, H. 2010.Impact of Farm Size and Uncertainty on Technologies by the Fish Farmers in Bogra District of
Technology Disadoption, Selected Paper prepared for Bangladesh. International Journal of Agriculture
presentation at the Southern Agricultural Economics Innovations and Research. 3(2).
Association Annual Meeting, Orlando. Sengupta, T. A. 1967. simple adoption scale for farmers for high
Gray, W. and Shadbegian, R. 1998. Environmental Regulation, yielding varieties of paddy. Indian Jour. of Exten.Edu., 3:
Investment Timing, and Technology Choice. Journal of 107–115.
Industrial Economics.,46(2): 235–256. Sial, M.H., Iqbal, S. and Sheikh, A.D. 2012.Farm size-productivity’
Hailu, B.K., Abrha, B.K. and Weldegiorgis, K.A. 2014. Adoption and relationship Recent Evidence from Central Punjab Pakistan.
impact of agricultural technologies on farm income: Economic and Social Review., 50(2): 139–162.
evidence from southern Tigray, Northern Ethiopia. Singh, K.M., Singh, R.K.P. and Kumar, A. 2014. Adoption of Modern
International Journal of Food and Agricultural Agricultural Technologies: A Micro Analysis at Farm
Economics.,2(4): 91–106. Level in Bihar. Environment & Ecology., 32(4): 1342–
Hussain, S.S., Byerlee, D. and Heisey, P.W. 1994. Impacts of the 1346.
training and visit extension system on farmers' knowledge Sreenivasa, B.T. and Hiriyanna. 2014. A study on the factors
and adoption of technology: Evidence from Pakistan. influencing adoption of new technologies in non-traditional
Agricultural Economics.,10: 39–47. sericultural area of chitradurga district, Karnataka.
Just, R.E. and Zilberman, D. 1983. Stochastic structure, farm size and g.j.b.a.h.s., 3(1): 239–243.
technology adoption in developing agriculture. Oxford Stigler, S.M. (1974). Gergonne's 1815 paper on the design and analysis
Economic Papers., 35(2): 307–328. of polynomial regression experiments. Historia
Karunathilaka, D.D.D.S. and Thayaparan, A. 2016. Determinants of Mathematica. Vol. 1(4), pp.431–439.
Farmers’ Perceptions towards the Adoption of New Swathi, L.P.S., Balasubramani, N. and Chandrakandan, K. 2011.
Farming Techniques in Paddy Production in Sri Lanka. Diffusion of scientific shrimp farming through various
Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development., stages of the adoption period. Tropical agricultural
7(12): 2222–2855. research & extension., 14(4): 93–98.
Kashem, M.A. 2005. Bangladesh Factors affecting the adoption of Thapa, S.2007. The relationship between farm size and productivity:
aquaculture technologies by the farmers. Fish. Res. 9(1): empirical evidence from the Nepalese mid-hills.
77–79. Contributed paper prepared for presentation at the 106th
Khan, A., Guttormsen, A. and Roll, K.H. 2017. Production risk of seminar of the EAAE Pro-poor development in low income
pangas (Pangasius hypophthalmus) fish farming in countries: Food, agriculture, trade, and environment,
Bangladesh, Aquaculture Economics and Management., Montpellier, France.
1–17 Thompson, O.A. and Mafimisebi, T.E. 2014. Profitability of Selected
Khan, A. 2012. Efficiency, risk and management of fisheries sector in Ventures in Catfish Aquaculture in Ondo State, Nigeria.
Bangladesh, Philosophiae Doctor (PhD) Thesis, Norwegian Fisheries and Aquaculture Journal., 5:096. doi:10.4172/
University of Life Sciences, Norway. 2150-3508.100096.
MoF. 2015-16. Bangladesh Economic Review, Finance Division, Tziraki, C., Graubard, B.I., Manley, M., Kosary, C., Moler, J.E.
Ministry of Finance, and Government of the people’s Edwards, B.K.2000. Effect of Training on Adoption of
republic of Bangladesh. Cancer Prevention Nutrition-Related Activities by Primary
Moreno, R. and Surinach, J. 2014. Innovation Adoption and Care Practices: Results of a Randomized Controlled Study.
Productivity Growth: Evidence for Europe. Research J Gen Intern Med.,15(3): 155–162.
Institute of Applied Economics Working Paper. 86(2): 62– Ureta, B.E., Cocchi, H. and Solis, D.2006. Adoption of soil
87. Conservation Technologies in El Salvador: A Cross-Section
Njankoua, W.D., Pouomogne, V., Nyemeck, B.J. and Yossa, N.R. and Over-Time Analysis. Office of Evaluation and
2012. Farmer’s Perception and Adoption of New Oversight, Inter-American Development Bank, December.
Aquaculture Technologies in the Western Highlands of www.stata.com/manuals13/rlpoly.pdf, STATA manual, College
Cameroon. Tropicultura.,30(3): 180–184. Station, Texas 77845 USA.

116

View publication stats