Factors Impacting Agricultural Production and The Role of Agricultural Extension Services in Kenya

Factors Impacting Agricultural Production and the Role of Agricultural
Extension Services in Kenya
Dr. Domeniter Naomi Kathula
ISSN: 2616-8456
Stratford Peer Reviewed Journals and Book Publishing
Journal of Agriculture
Volume 7||Issue 1 ||Page 22-44 ||January||2023|
Email: [email protected] ISSN: 2616-8456
Factors Impacting Agricultural Production and the Role of

Agricultural Extension Services in Kenya
Dr. Domeniter Naomi Kathula

Lecturer, the Management University of Africa
*E-Mail of the Corresponding Author:
[email protected];[email protected]
How to cite this article: Kathula, D. N. (2023). Factors Impacting Agricultural Production
and the Role of Agricultural Extension Services in Kenya, Journal of Agriculture, 7(1), 22-
44. https://doi.org/10.53819/81018102t4115
Abstract
Productivity in agricultural is also important for spurring economic growth in other sectors.
Farmers live in remote rural areas and make up 75% of the world’s poor. In Sub-Sahara Africa
(SSA), productivity in agriculture lags behind globally, and is below the required standards of
achieving food security, poverty goals and food sufficiency. As an important sector in the Kenyan
economy, agriculture continues to dominate other sectors despite its declining contribution to real
GDP. The development in agriculture is that one which revolutionizes the industry by bringing
forth profitable agriculture and environment friendly solutions. Kenya government through the
Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, have in the past tried to pass information to the farmers via
agricultural extension officers. However, the quality of the information disseminated to the farmers
has not been up to date, information delivery has not been good, the mode of communication also
questionable owing to literacy levels of our farmers and indeed that of the extension officers,
information technology has not been embraced fully making it difficult for our farmers to progress
with their counterparts in other parts of the world. This study was conducted with the aim of
determining the factors impacting agricultural production and the role of agricultural extension
services in Kenya. This study is anchored on Diffusion of Innovations Theory. The study employed
a mixed design involving a combination of both quantitative and qualitative approach. And the
target population was made up of farmers, officers from the ministry of agriculture and officers
from agricultural extension service providers. Data was gathered using both structured
questionnaire and interview guides. The collected data was analysed with the aid of SPSS software
using both descriptive and inferential statistics. The findings revealed a coefficient of
determination (R squared) of 0.319 implying that agricultural extension services explains 31.9 %
of the variation in agricultural production in Kenya. The study also showed a positive and
statistically significant relationship between agricultural extension services and agricultural
production in Kenya (β=1.561, p=.003<.05). The study concludes that agricultural extension
services play a significant role in improving agricultural production in Kenya because agricultural
extension services offers technical advice on agriculture to farmers. It is thus recommended that
https://doi.org/10.53819/81018102t4115
22
agricultural extension service delivery should be boosted through timely recruitment, periodic
training of agents and provision of adequate logistics to the farmers.
Keywords: Agricultural extension services, agricultural factors, agricultural production, farmers
in Kenya
1.0 Background to the Study

Fundamentally, agriculture has continued to be a catalyst of development that is sustainable,
enhanced food security and the reduction of poverty in countries that are developing (Sazonova,
Borisova, Terentyev, Kramlikh & Sidorenkova, 2021). Productivity in agricultural is also
important for spurring economic growth in other sectors. According to the World Bank (2020),
farmers live in remote rural areas and make up 75% of the world’s poor. In Sub-Sahara Africa
(SSA), productivity in agriculture lags behind globally, and is below the required standards of
achieving food security, poverty goals and food sufficiency. The World Bank report (2021) stated
that about two thirds of the world population are mainly concentrated in rural areas, which are
predominantly agriculture-oriented areas. Therefore in respect to poverty eradication and raising
the welfare standards of the population; more focus should be put on agricultural production.
Agricultural productivity can be measured at many different levels. For instance, the production
systems of a single farm, a multi-farm cooperative, a region, a country or even the planet can all
be measured based on agricultural productivity (Sazonova et al., 2021). On a country level,
agricultural productivity growth measures agricultural exports versus imports. A government that
can sustain a higher level of agricultural exports supports a more robust economic growth rate,
becomes more competitive globally and maintains more sustainable food prices for its population.
Agriculture is the main source of income for hundreds of millions of people around the world
suffering from poverty and hunger (WFP, 2019). Most of them are affiliated with small farms or
small farms- plots of land roughly the size of a soccer pitch or American football field. Agriculture
began slowly with only a handful of crops, and most food was collected from the wild. According
to Qader et al. (2021), changes in soil and weather may have supported agriculture and its
continued growth. In contrast to hunting, agriculture can feed more people in the same area.
Initially, agriculture was primarily for personal use, but has evolved into commercial agriculture.
Agriculture has also expanded to include a variety of techniques such as crop rotation, fencing,
fertilizer use, plantations, weeding, livestock and breeding. This technology is designed to increase
agricultural production and production to increase yields; similarly, agriculture is widespread
around the world today due to a variety of factors (Khudoynazarovich, 2021). The millennium
development goals (MDGs) of reducing hunger and to promote food security are rooted in
increasing agricultural productivity, especially from the crop sector. This is because agriculture is
considered as the engine of growth in many developing economies, particularly in sub-Saharan
Africa (SSA).
Education is the key factor that determines agricultural production in adopting inputs in general
and management demanding practices in particular (Ruzzante, Labarta & Bilton, 2021). According
to Isidore, Cisabu and Murhebwa (2018), educated HH farmers have a better access for agricultural
information that is pertinent for decision making on what and when to produce; to adopt and use
inputs efficiently thereby increase production. In Nigeria, Amaza et al. (2016) put forward as
education is the principal factor that seriously determines food crop production where educated
farmers are committed to go to the peripheral areas of the country and exploit the potential
23
reservations. Adebiyi and Okunlola (2013); Uwamariya, Kyule and Eric (2022) put forward that
adopting new inputs by itself could never be a guarantee for increasing agricultural production.
The rationale is that, properly utilizing and exploiting the opportunity is the most difficult thing
that illiterate farmers are facing. Hence, education is a vaccination that needs to be encouraged so
as to adopt and properly utilize agricultural technologies thereby increase agricultural production.
Moreover, Thierfelder and Mhlanga (2022) inferred that education as a source of knowledge has
had resulted in a brain wash for farmers to reject the traditional agricultural system and adopt the
new technique; knowledgeable farmers are keen enough to adopt techniques that control weed,
enhance residue management, encourages crop rotation and fertilizer adoption.
In agricultural-dependent economies, agricultural extension services have been the main conduit
for disseminating information on farm technologies, support rural adult learning and assist farmers
in developing their farm technical and managerial skills (Wang, Wang, Zhang & Wang, 2021). It
is expected that agricultural extension programmes will help increase farm productivity, farm
revenue, reduce poverty and minimize food insecurity. According to Kassem, Alotaibi, Muddassir
and Herab (2021), the agricultural extension services include capacity building in good agricultural
practices, creating linkages among the value chain actors (input dealers, farmers, wholesalers and
retailers) and other value addition techniques. Thus, wider dissemination of information regarding
farmer skill development, the use of improved farm technologies, general farm management
practices and easy access to input and output markets have been the fundamental principles
underlying delivery of agricultural extension services (Wang et al., 2021). All these are geared
towards improvement in productivity, reduction in poverty and enhancement in food security.
Given the scale of investment from various agricultural stakeholders, the value for money
regarding an increase in farm income is an important policy question.
Agricultural extension programmes have been one of the main channels of addressing rural poverty
and food insecurity, because it has the means to transfer technology, support rural adult learning,
assist farmers in problem-solving and getting farmers actively involved in the agricultural
knowledge and information system (Antwi-Agyei & Stringer, 2021). Extension is defined by FAO
as; “systems that should facilitate the access of farmers, their organizations and other market actors
to knowledge, information and technologies; facilitate their interaction with partners in research,
education, agribusiness, and other relevant institutions; and assist them to develop their own
technical, organizational and management skills and practices”. By this definition, an extension is
deemed as a primary tool for making agriculture, its related activities as well as other economic
activities more effective and efficient to meet the needs of the people (Nyarko & Kozári, 2021). It
is, therefore, regarded as a policy tool for promoting the safety and quality of agricultural products.
Agricultural extension is aimed primarily at improving the knowledge of farmers for rural
development; as such, it has been recognized as a critical component for technology transfer. Thus,
agricultural extension is a major component to facilitate development since it plays a starring role
in agricultural and rural development efforts (Antwi-Agyei & Stringer, 2021).
In Brazil, traditionally agricultural extension services have been provided by public institutions
directly, relying exclusively on government funds (Pellegrina, 2022). However, over the years
rural extension services were also offered by private firms, NGOs, and rural organizations (rural
labour union or farmers organizations), at the federal, state and municipal levels. The farming
structure in Brazil is divided into rural settlements as a result of land reform or inhabitants of
riverbanks, which could be farmers or not; smallholder farms (usually family farming producing
for subsistence or local market); middle size farms (usually producing for national market); and
24
large size farms (usually producing for export markets) (Garofalo et al.,2022). Family agriculture
corresponds to 84.4% of all agricultural establishments in Brazil, using only 24.3% of its
agricultural area, and producing 30% of all agricultural products.
Africa in general and SSA in particular depends on rain fed agriculture with its erratic nature
(Girma, 2022). According to Hussen and Geleta (2021), average annual rainfall in dry semi-arid
areas of SSA are less than 700 millimeters; and this makes soils poor in nitrogen and phosphorus.
Furthermore, Fadeyi, Ariyawardana and Aziz (2022) argue that SSA is being characterized by low
and highly unpredictable levels of rainfall and high temperatures; and these features would
ultimately erode the soil organic matter and would result in poor soil quality and low agricultural
production. As a natural determinant factor, Dim and Ezenekwe (2018) found that a 1 % increase
in rainfall will result in 1.14% increase in agricultural output in Nigeria. In the same line of
reference, they surmised that, to keep the soil wet, when rain is insufficient, irrigation could serve
as a proxy and would increase crop yielding. Zambia, Namonje-Kapembwa, Chiwawa and Sitko
(2022) found that as one modus operandi of soil fertility preservation, conservation agriculture is
primarily important in providing stable crop production and food security. In Ethiopia, Shumet
(2019) found that soil fertility is the one that best describes agricultural production and technical
efficiency of farmers where those with fertile land are endowed with ample agricultural
production.
In Kenya, agriculture is taunted to be the backbone of her economy. Almost 20% of Kenyan’s total
land area is fertile as it has enough rain to enable farming to take place, (Kenya country profile
2020). According to Ministry of Agriculture, (2020) majority of Kenyans lived by farming and
more than half of its agricultural production is for family consumption. Agriculture earns Kenya
25% of its GDP and it employs 75% of its workforce (Ministry of Agriculture, 2020). Kenya’s
Vision 2030 program emphasized the fact that agricultural growth as a sector is the main issue to
be looked at (Republic of Kenya, 2019). The agriculture sector contributes 51 percent of Kenya's
GDP (26 percent directly and 25 percent indirectly) and accounts for 60 percent of employment
and 65 percent of exports (World Bank, 2020). A number of factors have been identified by
researchers as determinants of agricultural production.
Auya, Barasa and Sambu (2022) identified land and population pressures as factors impacting
agricultural production in Kenya. The asserted that average farm size in Kenya is falling and land
distribution is becoming more concentrated, leading to significant constraints on production,
particularly for smallholders. Elsewhere, Kogo, Kumar, Koech and Hasan (2022) pointed out that
the proportion of farmers accessing extension advice in Kenya is low, while extension services
tend to favour wealthier farmers; Government spending on agricultural research has fallen steadily
over the past decade. Market is another factors impacting agricultural production in Kenya.
Government intervention in cereal markets distorts production and diverts resources from
investments that might be more effective and efficient in improving productivity. While physical
access to markets has generally improved, farmers report a number of institutional barriers and
transaction costs related to market information and marketing processes. Access to credit is a
constraint across the sector.
1.1 Statement of the Problem
As an important sector in the Kenyan economy, agriculture continues to dominate other sectors
despite its declining contribution to real GDP. The development in agriculture is that one which
revolutionizes the industry by bringing forth profitable agriculture and environment friendly
25
solutions (Economy Watch, 2018). Development in agriculture entails giving aid to farmers by the
use of different resources, and this could be done through the provision of protection, research
assistance, and use of technology, control and management of diseases and pests and facilitating
ion the section of diversification (Economy Watch, 2018). Kenya government through the Ministry
of Agriculture and Livestock, have in the past tried to pass information to the farmers via
agricultural extension officers (GoK, 2020). However, the quality of the information disseminated
to the farmers has not been up to date, information delivery has not been good, the mode of
communication also questionable owing to literacy levels of our farmers and indeed that of the
extension officers, information technology has not been embraced fully making it difficult for our
farmers to progress with their counterparts in other parts of the world.
It should be known that extension services includes more than just advising farmers on crop or
livestock matters only but it includes an organized activities that educates, guides and adds value
to the general welfare of the farmer (Kingiri, 2021). Emphasis should be put into the professional
diversity of personnel in the extension services to enable farmers get full quality information that
encompasses all aspects of agribusiness that range from crop and animal farming, quality breeds
and hybrids, farm inputs, land management and marketing of the same in addition to embracing
Information Technology.
The Kenyan Agricultural Sector Development Strategy 2010-2020 sets out a detailed plan to
position the agricultural sector as a key driver for delivering the 10 per cent annual economic
growth rate envisaged under the economic pillar of Vision 2030 (Ministry of Agriculture, 2019).
The vision of the document is a food secure and prosperous nation and the strategy aimed at
increasing productivity, commercialization and competitiveness of agricultural commodities and
enterprises; and develop and manage key factors of production. Also important is government’s
goal of 10 percent farm forest cover on all agricultural land holding. However, the agricultural
sector in Kenya is particularly vulnerable to adversities of weather, not only because farmers
depend on rain fed agriculture, but also on small farm sizes that are not economically viable.
These smallholder farmers thus already operate under pressure from food insecurity, increased
poverty and water scarcity (Evans, Samuel & Samuel, 2021). This scenario constitutes a real
challenge for a government of Kenya with a population of over 50 million to feed. More worrisome
is the fact that increase in the gap between population growth and agricultural production capacity
is exacerbating the already declining food security, and increasing vulnerability and rural poverty,
which amplify the impacts of climate change that appear to have become more severe in the recent
years. The current study thus sought to determine the factors impacting on agricultural production
and the role of agricultural extension services in Kenya.
1.2 Research Objectives
i. To assess the factors impacting agricultural production in Kenya.
ii. To establish the role of agricultural extension services on agricultural production in Kenya.
1.3 Research Questions
i. What are the factors impacting agricultural production in Kenya?
ii. What role does agricultural extension services play on agricultural production in Kenya?
26
2.1 Theoretical Framework

This study was anchored on Diffusion of Innovations Theory as proposed by Rogers (1962). This
is a theory that tries to find in what way, what is the cause, and at what speed new techniques and
technologies get to be known (Simin & Janković, 2014). This theory estimates that arriving at
judgments, giving of opinions and information provision is done by interpersonal relations and the
media. Rogers (1962) argue that for an innovation to occur some elements must be in play; the
technology or innovation, the channels of communication, period of time and an interrelationship
of individuals, and human resource is relied here heavily. The technology must be adopted
immensely for it to be self-sustaining. The Diffusion of Innovations theory was the leading theory
in agricultural extension post-World War II until the 1970s (Lavoie, Dentzman & Wardropper,
2021). It is still used today in agricultural extension, particularly when extension is concerned with
an adoption of a particular technology (i.e. technology transfer approach to extension).
Basing this research on this theory the aspect of agricultural extension services comes into play, it
dictates that for an innovation to be adopted it should be told over time in a given group of people
in this case, the extension service providers and the farmers (Rogers, Singhal & Quinlan, 2014).
According to Dan, Osterheider and Raupp (2019), the communication channel should be right and
the timing is critical and the process of adoption relies heavily on human capital. Hence proper
and adequate resources should be pumped into the personnel docket for the technology to be
diffused properly. Tailor-made brochures with specific agricultural messages can be circulated to
the farmers which are easy to read, easy to refer and easy to archive for future reference. Rogers
(1962) was convinced that the adoption of innovations follows a universal process of social
change. It originated in communications to explain how, over time, an idea or product gains
momentum and spreads (or diffuses, hence the name) through a specific population or social
system.
The field extension officers can conduct agricultural seminars where specific agricultural messages
can be taught via either a recorded audiovisual or one on one (Lavoie et al., 2021). If the training
is not done properly and professionally, farmers will not get that vital needed knowledge that can
spur agricultural productivity. The messages should be packaged in simple terms/language for easy
understanding to the farmers. The information can be disseminated via radio, television or
packaged on CDs/DVDs or Tapes to be played back at the comfort of the farmer’s house. The
feedback element of communication entails that the extension officers can get reports from the
farmers from what they were taught and trained on. This may be used as a benchmark to gauge
whether learning took place or not. This theory was thus considered relevant to the current study
since it explains how agricultural extensional services especially those that involves technology
application can be used to enhance agricultural production in Kenya.
2.2 Empirical Review
2.2.1 Factors Impacting on Agricultural Production
Omache (2016) examined the Factors influencing agricultural productivity in Kenya: A case of
Nyathuna ward in Kabete Sub-County, Kiambu County. The objectives of the study were to;
establish social-economic factors influencing agricultural productivity, examine the influence of
agricultural technology uptake on productivity, establish the influence of extension service
delivery on agricultural productivity and assess the influence of information dissemination
methods used for agricultural productivity. The study adopted a descriptive survey research design
and 200 respondents were the sample size that was selected from a list of 7794 farmers in Nyathuna
27
Ward Kabete Sub-County. The study findings revealed a positive correlation between the methods
used for the dissemination of agricultural information and agricultural productivity. The study
established that social economic factors could influence agricultural productivity negatively or
positively. From the findings combination of both family and hired labour is used heavily when
conducting all farm activities meaning that if family labour is removed from the equation, the cost
of production will go up. The study recommended that formulation of policies by the Government
of Kenya may be done by the use of the findings therein; so that positive impacts to the farmers
are realized as far as agricultural productivity is concerned and guide the agricultural extension
officers in coming up with better ways to disseminate agricultural information to farmers in their
quest to improve agricultural production.
A study by Nyinamugisha (2019) established that the major socioeconomic factors impacting
agricultural productivity were mainly fertility of land, the rate of inflation in the country, ability to
obtain seeds, access to fertilizers, purchasing power of maize in this area and household income.
The institutional factors included poor climate change prediction by government, access to
agriculture information, the distance to the market, government set prices for maize and marketing
association while the major technologies factors established by the study were machinery cost,
innovative farmers in terms of agricultural technology, access to high breed seed varieties and
access to extension services. The study indicated that strategies which mainly included adopting
genetically modified crops, improve access to financial services, land reforms to reduce on land
fragmentation, improvement of infrastructure, develop high-yield crops and provision of better
incentives to farmers can be adopted to boost agricultural production. The study further
recommend that government should put more emphasis in getting ways to incorporate the use of
genetically modified plants to improve on yields, coming up with land reforms to help curb the
habit of land fragmentation, government to put in place more village banks and SACCOs to
provide an alternative to farmers financial needs, government to provide more facilitation to the
body concerned with weather change prediction and adopting zoning in the agricultural sector by
encouraging growth of particular crops in particular areas which the nature of soils are favorable.
According to Liang, Wu, Chambers, Schmoldt, Gao, Liu and Kennedy (2017), temperature, or
climate is one of the natural forces impacting on agricultural production where there is the least
chance of human involvement. They believe there are specific circumstances, like greenhouses,
but in terms of efficiency, greenhouses might not offer a significant return. Furthermore, although
using natural means is less expensive, a greenhouse requires specialized equipment. Additionally,
Liang et al. (2017) assert that the vegetative phase, which is the stage of plant reproduction, is
influenced by temperature. The products get more developed the more heat they receive
throughout the vegetative phase. Factors such as the humidity requirement of the plant and the
temperature required by the product are the factors that determine productivity in agriculture
(Hoang et al., 2021). What is meant by farmer experience is that the product that can be grown
according to the climate or latitude should be selected. It is not impossible to grow the product
suitable for tropical climates in the Black Sea climate. However, the productivity will not be the
same.
Jha, Doshi, Patel and Shah (2019) conducted a comprehensive review on automation in agriculture
using artificial intelligence and found that the traditional method which is also referred to as
extensive agriculture, can lead to negativities in agriculture. They suggested that extensive
agriculture should not be thought of as completely negative. A farmer who supports agriculture
with only precipitation may not be able to meet the water needs of the product depending on natural
28
factors. Socially, only traditional agriculture is used in the environment, and not using technology
irrigation methods as a method causes the crops to be exposed to drought. In cases such as spraying
and fertilizing the products, ignoring modern agriculture completely can cause a waste of energy
and time. The effectiveness of the equipment used for the land is another factor impacting
agriculture; being able to procure products with advanced technology that enables more efficient
production and harvesting ensures that it is among the economic factors (Elavarasan, Vincent,
Sharma, Zomaya & Srinivasan, 2018). The productivity of agriculture is also affected when the
farmer has access to products in an economic context. Sufficient labor in field planting or crop
harvesting ensures both growth and harvesting of the product in a quality manner. The fast
collection of products like fruits and vegetables that mature in a short period of time affects the
quality of the product. At the same time, the productivity of the soil will increase as the product is
collected in a high-quality manner.
A study by Rada, Helfand and Magalhães (2019) pointed out that agriculture has been an island of
success in terms of productivity growth in the last decades compared to other sectors of the
Brazilian economy and compared to other country’s agriculture sector. Agriculture productivity
growth in recent decades in Brazil has been mainly driven by investments in agriculture
innovation, facilitation of sector financing, and trade liberalization. Trade liberalization has shown
to be an important factor in the growth of agriculture productivity in recent decades, which can
serve as an important experience for other Brazilian economic sectors that remain relatively close
to trade. Rada et al. (2019) argue that agriculture productivity in Brazil has room to grow further,
improving productivity of lagging mid-size farmers and regions, reforming agriculture policies
towards agriculture financing, agro logistics, and research and development (R&D). Experience
within Brazil shows that agriculture productivity can continue to grow without depleting natural
capital nor further increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; unlike the structural economic
transformation of other countries, Brazilian agriculture productivity growth has been a net job
creator.
Agriculture productivity growth in Brazil can therefore continue its positive upward trend, while
being environmentally sustainable, creating jobs, and increasing incomes for the rural poor. The
motivation for this report is to explore the evolution and source of the strong agriculture
productivity growth that has occurred in Brazil in recent decades, identifying opportunities and
challenges for future development of the sector (de Mello et al., 2020). The goal is to look for
opportunities to accelerate agriculture productivity growth, to have an increased impact on sector
growth, jobs, environmental sustainability, and poverty reduction, as well as potentially to shed
light on lessons that can contribute to efforts to boost productivity in other sectors within Brazil.
Onogwu, Audu and Igbodor (2017) while examining the factors influencing agricultural
productivity of smallholder farmers in Taraba State, Nigeria, established that the factors found to
be highly significant and impacting farmers’ productivity include access to formal credit or loan
(at 5%), farm size of the respondents (5%), membership of farm based organization (FBO, at 1%))
and number of years the farmers had spent in school (at 10%), among others. The factors that were
not highly significant, but exact some influence on farmers’ productivity included age, experience,
access to extension agent, and gender. The study also indicated that modernizing agriculture
requires large infusion of credit to finance the use of purchased inputs such as fertilizers, improved
seeds, insecticides, additional labour and so on. In this regard, the provision of agricultural credit
can be a powerful economic force for development if used to inject appropriate capital for the
purchase of agricultural inputs that are not otherwise available to farmers from their own financial,
29
physical and labour resources. The study thus recommended that farmers should belong to farm
based organization irrespective of the volume of credit received since farm based information are
most available and cheaply too, in local vernacular during farm based organization meetings.
In Ghana, Enu and Attah-Obeng (2019) evaluated macro factors influence agricultural production.
The main aim of the research study was to find out the key macro factors that influence agricultural
production in Ghana. The Cobb-Douglas production was employed and the Ordinary Least
Squares estimation technique was used. The independent variables used included labour force,
inflation, real exchange rate and Real GDP per capita. The findings revealed that an increase in
labour force caused a decrease in agricultural production. In addition, the study found that an
increase in inflation caused agricultural production to increase, an increase in real exchange rate
caused agricultural production to increase and finally, an increase in real GDP per capita caused a
decrease in agricultural production. Apart from inflation, labour force, real exchange rate and real
GDP per impacting agricultural production in Ghana are labour force, real exchange rate and real
GDP per capita. The study thus recommended that the agricultural sector should be made more
attractive and conductive to ensure continuous production of food in Ghana.
2.2.2 Role of Agricultural Extension Services in Agricultural Production
According to Antwi-Agyei and Stringer (2021), farmers need information on various topics, at
intervals, before new technology is adopted; information that farmers need may vary according to
one’s need and ranges from inputs, pests and disease control, prices of commodities to even
weather forecasts. This information can be obtained from different areas that may include, among
others, their social network and from their own trial and error. Unfortunately information is not
costless in yet to fully develop countries. According to Anderson and Feder (2017), agricultural
extension is the delivering of inputs information to farmers. The officer is always armed with fresh
and new techniques and messages for his clients. This approach lacks a two-way flow of
information. It does not separate information according to the agro systems. During the
dissemination of a new technology is when extension service is of much benefit to the farmers,
once most of them become aware of it the extension drive fizzles out (Byerlee, 2018). The essential
components of extension service are the information and communication aspect of it but rarely do
these systems and get integrated with development policies and strategies (FAO, 2022).
Wang, Wang, Zhang and Wang (2021) conducted an evaluation of agricultural extension service
for sustainable agricultural development using a hybrid entropy and TOPSIS method. The study
analyzed the influence of agricultural extension service on sustainable agricultural development,
and constructs an evaluation system for sustainable agricultural development from the four
dimensions of agricultural environment, society, economy, and agricultural extension service. The
study used framework based on the combination of technique for order performance by similarity
to ideal solution (TOPSIS) and entropy method to evaluate the performance of the evaluation
system. Taking three national modern agriculture demonstration zones in Suzhou in Jiangsu
Province as a case study, the method was verified. Moreover, the main factors affecting sustainable
agricultural development were discussed, and the improvement measures and management
suggestions were also put forward to reduce the obstacles to sustainable agricultural development
and improve sustainable agriculture practice. The study revealed that the evaluation system of
Agricultural Economics Society for sustainable agricultural development is an effective way of
realizing sustainable agricultural development. It is an effective tool to promote sustainable
agricultural development by analyzing the main factors affecting sustainable agricultural
30
development, putting forward improvement measures, improving the efficiency of AES, reducing
the obstacles of sustainable agricultural development, and improving the decision-making of the
agricultural sustainable system.
Sulandjari, Putra, Sulaminingsih, Adi Cakranegara, Yusroni and Andiyan (2022) evaluated
agricultural extension in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic: Issues and challenges in the field.
The study indicated that different environments demand different solutions. Where soils are poor
and depleted, as in many parts of Africa, fertilization is an urgent need. In regions with moderate
fertilizer usage, an improvement in nutrient management hand in hand with other practices is
required. The study suggested that where the knowledge being communicated is embedded in, or
closely associated with, market goods (e.g. tractors, hybrid seeds, fertilizers etc.), the delivery of
relevant advice can be left to the private sector, within an appropriate regulatory framework.
However, where the technology or practice being promoted is associated with a toll good (such as
farm management or marketing information), the delivery of extension advice is best handled by
a judicious combination of public and private entities. If a common-pool good (such as soil, water
and air resources, community forests, fisheries, common pastures etc.) is involved, it is highly
beneficial to connect the advisory activities closely with cooperative or voluntary action. Where
market and participation failures are high, for instance where subsistence farming dominates, a
public sector approach to agricultural extension is required. The study concluded that agricultural
extension services offers technical advice on agriculture to farmers, and also supplies them with
the necessary inputs and services to support their agricultural production. It provides information
to farmers and passes to the farmers’ new ideas developed by agricultural research stations.
Danso-Abbeam, Ehiakpor and Aidoo (2018) carried out a study that assessed agricultural
extension service and its effects on farm productivity and income with an insight from Northern
Ghana. The study pointed out that agricultural extension programmes have been the main conduit
for disseminating information on farm technologies, support rural adult learning and assist farmers
in developing their farm technical and managerial skills, and it is expected that extension
programmes will help increase farm productivity, farm revenue, reduce poverty and minimize food
insecurity. The study employed cross-sectional data collected from 200 farm households from two
districts in the Northern region of Ghana. The robustness of the estimates was tested by the use of
regression on covariates, regression on propensity scores and Heckman treatment effect model.
The findings revealed that there existed positive economic gains from participating in the ACDEP
agricultural extension programmes. Apart from the primary variable of interest (ACDEP
agricultural extension programme), socio-economic, institutional and farm-specific variables were
estimated to significantly affect farmers’ farm income depending on the estimation technique used.
The study concluded that critical role of extension programmes in enhancing farm productivity
and household income. It was thus, recommended that agricultural extension service delivery
should be boosted through timely recruitment, periodic training of agents and provision of
adequate logistics.
3.0 Research methodology
This study employed a mixed design involving a combination of both quantitative and qualitative
approach. The study used a survey research design, specifically a cross-sectional survey research
design. Cross-sectional survey design involves collecting data from a large group of people of
different stages of growth at one point in time. The target population for this study included
farmers, officers from the ministry of agriculture and agricultural extension officers.
31
The study purposively selected 30 farmers, 5 officers from the ministry of agriculture and 5
agricultural extension officers. This study used both questionnaire and interview guide to collect
primary data. The questionnaires were administered to the farmers, while interview guide was
administered to both officers from the ministry of agriculture and agricultural extension officers.
The quantitative data collected using the questionnaire was analyzed with the aid of SPSS. Both
descriptive and inferential statistics were used. The qualitative data gathered using interviews was
analyzed thematically using content analysis. The findings were presented in tables.
4.0 Findings and Discussion
The researcher administered 30 questionnaires to the 30 selected farmers, interviewed 5 officers
from the ministry of agriculture and 5 agricultural extension officers. Out of the 30 questionnaires
administered, 26 were dully filled and returned, yielding a response rate of 86.7%. In addition, all
the sampled officers from the ministry of agriculture and agricultural extension officers agreed to
be interviewed yielding a response rate of 100 percent. According to Bailey, Singarayer and
Rhodes (2000) a response rate of 50% and above is adequate, while if a response rate is more than
70% is considered very good. The demographic information about the study participants revealed
that majority of the farmers were male (14, 53.8%), whereas 12(46.2%) were female. Majority of
the farmers were aged between 46-55 years (11, 42.3%) and most of them were master’s degree
holders (8, 30.8%). In terms of experience, most of the farmers had been involved in farming for
a period of at least two decades (9, 34.6%) and most of them were practicing farming on their own
pieces of land. Finally most of the farmers were from households with family size of between 4-5
family members (15, 57.7%).
4.1 Descriptive Analysis
Descriptive statistics was used to depict the features of the data in this study and this was because
descriptive statistics provide simple summaries about the sample and the measures. Descriptive
analysis simply forms the basis of every quantitative analysis of data and includes the mean and
standard deviation (Trochim & Donnelly, 2001). Table 1 shows descriptive results on factors
impacting agricultural production in Kenya.
32
Table 1: Factors Impacting Agricultural Production in Kenya

Strongly Strongly Std.
Statement Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree Mean Dev.
Use of modern technology has
1.366
revolutionized agriculture. 11.50% 7.70% 3.80% 34.60% 42.30% 3.885
Climate change has had an
impact on agriculture in the
3.962 1.428
country. 15.40% 0.00% 7.70% 26.90% 50.00%
Pests and disease have become
3.962 1.311
serious threat to agriculture. 7.70% 11.50% 3.80% 30.80% 46.20%
Soil fertility has been
declining hindering
4.000 1.166
agricultural production 7.70% 3.80% 7.70% 42.30% 38.50%
The agricultural sector
extension service plays a key
role in disseminating
knowledge, technologies and
agricultural information, and
in linking farmers with other
3.769 1.394
actors in the economy. 15.40% 0.00% 15.40% 30.80% 38.50%
Inadequate research–
extension–farmer linkages to
facilitate demand-driven
research and increased use of
improved technologies
continue to constrain efforts to
increase agricultural
4.192 1.266
productivity. 11.50% 0.00% 0.00% 34.60% 53.80%
Most farmers lack information
on the right type of farm inputs
to use and the appropriate time
4.115 1.306
of application of the same. 11.50% 0.00% 7.70% 26.90% 53.80%
The rising population density
has contributed to the
subdivision of land to
uneconomically small units
hampering agricultural
4.346 1.198
production. 7.70% 3.80% 0.00% 23.10% 65.40%
The reduction of fallow
periods and continuous
cultivation have led to rapid
depletion of soil nutrients,
declining yields and
2.423 1.701
environmental degradation. 50.00% 11.50% 7.70% 7.70% 23.10%
Poor rural roads and other key
physical infrastructure have
led to high transportation costs
for agricultural inputs and
3.346 1.441
products. 15.40% 15.40% 15.40% 26.90% 26.90%
33
Based on the descriptive results in Table 1, majority of the respondents (76.9%) agreed that the
use of modern technology had revolutionized agriculture, another 76.9% did agree that climate
change had an impact on agriculture in the country, while 77% of them indicated that Pests and
disease had become serious threat to agriculture. The results also show that a majority (80.8%)
were convinced that soil fertility had been declining hindering agricultural production, 69.30%
moreover indicated that the agricultural sector extension service was playing a key role in
disseminating knowledge, technologies and agricultural information, and in linking farmers with
other actors in the economy. Furthermore, a majority of the farmers (88.4%) were of the opinion
that inadequate research-extension-farmer linkages to facilitate demand- driven research and
increased use of improved technologies was continuing to constrain efforts to increase agricultural
productivity. In addition, it is evident from the findings that majority of the farmers (80.7%) were
convinced that most farmers lacked information on the right type of farm inputs to use and the
appropriate time of application of the same. Similarly, most (88.5%) of the farmers were in
agreement that the rising population density had contributed to the subdivision of land to
uneconomically small units hampering agricultural production. However, most (61.5%) disagreed
with the statement that the reduction of fallow periods and continuous cultivation had led to rapid
depletion of soil nutrients, declining yields and environmental degradation. Finally, the study
found that most of the farmers (53.8%) were convinced poor rural roads and other key physical
infrastructure had led to high transportation costs for agricultural inputs and products.
In addition to the quantitative data gathered using questionnaire from the farmers, the researcher
conducted interviews with officers from the ministry of agriculture and they were asked to indicate
what they would consider the major factors impacting agricultural production. One of the officers
indicated that:
There are many factors that impact agricultural production in the country, but the most
common factors includes; uncoordinated technology generation, scaling and
dissemination; limited agricultural policy analyses, approval and advocacy; climate-
related challenges, including prolonged droughts and floods; limited access to relevant
agricultural inputs, especially seeds and fertilizers; limited smallholder farmer access to
markets; limited profitability of agriculture-related activities by the farmers; frequent
outbreaks of diseases and pests and limited access to extension / advisory services by the
smallholder farmers.
The officers were also asked to indicate the challenges that the ministry faces working with farmers
in Kenya. In response, one of the officers said that:
The most common challenges we face are; limited access to reliable data and information
on markets; limited access to reliable agro-meteorological data to guide farmers'
predictive ability on when to plant; limited access to reliable agricultural inputs; limited
access to output markets; low access to insurance services to guard them against risks,
pests and diseases; limited access to reliable technologies and innovations, especially
correct varieties and germplasm; emergence of invasive species, e.g. locusts;
uncoordinated policy analyses and advocacy and exploitation by middlemen along the
value chains.
The officers were also asked to indicate the issues they thought farmers across Kenya face in their
quest to access and use farm inputs like certified seeds and fertilizers. All the officers said that:
34
Farmers are faced with myriad of issues such as; Unclear policies on how to access these
inputs, unclear protocols on how to apply these inputs once acquired, i.e. correct quantity
and time; limited knowledge on what to do in case of different biophysical conditions
across the farmlands, e.g. soil type, moisture content, and land topography, unstable
market prices, issues related to quality of these inputs; delays in accessing these inputs to
coincide with the planting seasons.
In addition, the officers from the ministry of agriculture were asked to indicate how farmers in
Kenya receive new agricultural technology based on their own assessment. The officers indicated
that:
There are innovators (2.5%) and these farmers readily take risks, they mainly comprise
younger persons with stable financial base, there are also some early adopters (13.5%) of
available technologies. They generally have significant levels of leadership, and mainly
comprise young farmers with good financial and education base. Some of the farmers
(34%) who comprise early majority adopt the technologies after observing the innovators
and early adopters. These farmers generally possess above average social status and
rarely occupy positions of leadership. Other farmers (34%) fall under the category of late
majority who only adopt the technology after majority of the farmers have tested and
proven the technologies. They are generally very skeptical, and have below average social
status, very little financial buoyancy and hardly hold leadership positions. The last group
of farmers comprise the laggards (16%). These farmers have little to no leadership skills
and tend to focus on traditions, and have limited financial liquidity.
The study further sought to establish the role of agricultural extension services on agricultural
production in Kenya. Table 2 shows descriptive analysis results on the role of agricultural
extension services on agricultural production in Kenya.
35
Table 2: Role of Agricultural Extension Services on Agricultural Production

Strongly Strongly Std.
Statement Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Agree Mean Dev.
I get agricultural extension
0.752
service regularly 53.80% 30.80% 15.40% 0.00% 0.00% 1.615
An agricultural extension
service offers technical advice
2.269 1.282
on agriculture to farmers. 42.30% 15.40% 15.40% 26.90% 0.00%
Extension officers supplies me
with the necessary inputs and
services to support my
2.000 1.296
agricultural production. 50.00% 23.10% 11.50% 7.70% 7.70%
Extension services ensures I
have access to improved crop
2.308 1.408
varieties. 42.30% 19.20% 11.50% 19.20% 7.70%
Extension services ensures I
have access to better livestock
2.115 1.366
control 50.00% 15.40% 15.40% 11.50% 7.70%
Through agricultural extension
services I acquire improved
2.269 1.485
water management skills. 46.20% 19.20% 7.70% 15.40% 11.50%
Agricultural extensional
services ensures I have better
control of weeds, pests and
diseases, hence improved
2.115 1.336
yields 46.20% 23.10% 11.50% 11.50% 7.70%
Agricultural extension services
ensures that my efforts
towards increasing agricultural
2.269 1.041
productivity are sustainable. 26.90% 34.60% 23.10% 15.40% 0.00%
Development and
dissemination of improved
agricultural technologies to
these smallholder farmers in
the rural areas helps in
2.654 1.599
improving productivity. 38.50% 11.50% 15.40% 15.40% 19.20%
Extension services ensures
improvement in my
managerial and technical skills
through training, facilitation
and coaching, among others
which leads to improved
2.308 1.490
production. 46.20% 15.40% 11.50% 15.40% 11.50%
The results in Table 2 show that most (84.6%) denied getting agricultural extension service
regularly, 57.7% of the farmers also indicated that agricultural extension service was offering no
technical advice on agriculture to farmers, and 73.1% of them denied being supplied with
necessary inputs and services to support their agricultural production by extension officers.
36
Additionally, majority of the farmers (61.5%) disagreed that extension services were ensuring they
had access to improved crop varieties. In a similar vein, 65.4% of the respondents indicated that
extension services was not at all ensuring they had access to better livestock control.
Moreover, it is evident that most of the respondents (65.4%) did not agree with the statement that
through agricultural extension services they were acquiring improved water management skills,
69.3% of the farmers disagreed with the fact that agricultural extensional services was ensuring
they had better control of weeds, pests and diseases, hence improved yields, while 61.5% of the
farmers were convinced that agricultural extension services was never at all ensuring their efforts
towards increasing agricultural productivity were sustainable. Similarly, a half of the farmers
disagreed with the statement that development and dissemination of improved agricultural
technologies to these smallholder farmers in the rural areas helps in improving productivity.
Finally, it is evident from the findings that most (61.6%) of the farmers were never convinced that
extension services was able to ensure improvement in their managerial and technical skills through
training, facilitation and coaching, among others which leads to improved production. Table 3
shows descriptive analysis results on the agricultural production in Kenya.
Table 3: Descriptive Analysis on the agricultural production in Kenya
Strongly Strongl Std.
Statement Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree y Agree Mean Dev.
Farmers are embracing
1.143
technology in their farms 3.80% 11.50% 0.00% 38.50% 46.20% 4.115
3.577 0.987
There is improved crop yields. 0.00% 19.20% 19.20% 46.20% 15.40%
There is improved livestock
3.577 1.102
products. 7.70% 11.50% 7.70% 61.50% 11.50%
There is improved income
3.615 1.169
from agriculture. 7.70% 11.50% 11.50% 50.00% 19.20%
Better technology adoption
3.308 1.158
benchmarks have been set up 3.80% 26.90% 19.20% 34.60% 15.40%
There is enhancement of
3.346 1.093
extension service delivery 0.00% 30.80% 19.20% 34.60% 15.40%
Agricultural productivity has
3.615 1.023
improved generally 0.00% 15.40% 30.80% 30.80% 23.10%
Acreage under agriculture has
increased across the country
3.538 1.104
over the years. 0.00% 23.10% 23.10% 30.80% 23.10%
A majority (84.7%) of the farmers according to the results in Table 3 agreed that farmers were
embracing technology in their farms, 61.6% agreed that they had registered improved crop yields,
with 73% of them indicating that there had been improvement in livestock products. It is moreover
clear that most of the farmers (69.2%) were positive that there was improved income from
agriculture, a half of them cited better technology adoption benchmarks having been set up, while
another half indicated that there was enhancement of extension service delivery. Similarly,
majority (53.9%) of the farmers agreed that agricultural productivity had improved generally and
another 53.9% of the farmers were positive that acreage under agriculture had increased across the
country over the years. The results imply that generally there had been improved agricultural
37
production in Kenya which is attributable to availability and accessibility of agricultural extension

services by the farmers.
4.2 Inferential Statistics
The study conducted a simple linear regression analysis to determine the relationship between
agricultural extension services and agricultural production in Kenya. The model summary findings
are presented in Table 4.
Table 4: Model Summary
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .565a 0.319 0.291 0.49272
a. Predictors: (Constant), Agricultural Extension Services
Source: Field Data, 2022
The results show that the coefficient of determination (R squared) was 0.319 implying that
agricultural extension services explains 31.9 % of the variation in agricultural production in Kenya.
The adjusted R square of 0.291 depicts that agricultural extension services in exclusion of the
constant variable explained the variation in agricultural production in Kenya by 29.1% the
remaining percentage can be explained by other factors excluded from the model. Table 5 shows
the analysis of variance results.
Table 5: ANOVA
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Regression 2.732 1 2.732 11.254 .003b
1 Residual 5.827 24 0.243
Total 8.559 25
a. Dependent Variable: Agricultural Production
b. Predictors: (Constant), Agricultural Extension Services
The ANOVA results in Table 5 show that the model used was statistically significant in explaining
the influence agricultural extension services have on agricultural production in Kenya and it is
indicated by a p-value of 0.003<0.05. Regression coefficient results are presented in Table 6.
38
Table 6: Regression Coefficient

Model Unstandardized Standardized t Sig.
Coefficients Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 1.526 0.624 2.446 0.022
1 Agricultural Extension
Services 1.561 0.465 0.565 3.355 0.003
a. Dependent Variable: Agricultural Production
Y= 1.526+ 1.561X
Where
Y= Dependent Variable (Agricultural Production)
X= Agricultural Extension Services
The regression coefficient results in Table 6 show that there is a positive and statistically
significant relationship between agricultural extension services and agricultural production in
Kenya (β=1.561, p=.003<.05). This implies that a unit increase in the adoption and utilization of
agricultural extension services leads to an improvement in agricultural production by 1.561 units.
This is in agreement with the findings of Wang, Wang, Zhang and Wang (2021) who evaluated
agricultural extension services for sustainable agricultural development and found that the
evaluation system of Agricultural Economics Society for sustainable agricultural development was
an effective way of realizing sustainable agricultural development. The study indicated that
agricultural extension service is an effective tool to promote sustainable agricultural development
by analyzing the main factors affecting sustainable agricultural development, putting forward
improvement measures, improving the efficiency of AES, reducing the obstacles of sustainable
agricultural development, and improving the decision-making of the agricultural sustainable
system.
5.0 Conclusion
Based on the findings, this study concludes that there are a number of factors impacting agricultural
production in Kenya, key among them are; use of modern technology in farming which is literally
revolutionizing agriculture in the country, climate change, pests and diseases, change in soil
fertility, agricultural extensions services, information on firm inputs, population density which
results in subdivision of land, over cultivation, and state of the infrastructure such as roads to
facilitate transportation of the produce to the market. Also, agricultural extension services have
significant positive effect on agricultural production in Kenya. This study concludes that
agricultural extension services play a significant role in improving agricultural production in
Kenya because agricultural extension services offers technical advice on agriculture to farmers,
and also supplies them with the necessary inputs and services to support their agricultural
production.
39
Moreover agricultural extension services provide information to farmers and passes to the farmers’
new ideas developed by agricultural research stations. This study further concludes that extension
uses democratic methods in educating the farmers, helps in adoption of innovations, helps in
studying and solving the rural problems, increases farm yields and improve the standard of living
of farmers, makes good communities better and progressive, and also contributes to national
development programmes.
6.0 Recommendation
Based on the findings and the conclusions arrived at, thus study recommends that the government
of Kenya should formulate policies that will ensure positive impacts to the farmers are realized as
far as agricultural productivity is concerned and guide the agricultural extension officers in coming
up with better ways to disseminate agricultural information to farmers in their quest to improve
agricultural production. Additionally, agricultural extension service delivery should be boosted
through timely recruitment, periodic training of agents and provision of adequate logistics to the
farmers.
Moreover, the national government, county governments and development partners should commit
more human, financial and logistical resources to agricultural extension delivery in the country to
boost agricultural productivity, farm incomes and total household income. Also, access to
agricultural credit and formation of farmer groups such as farmer-based organizations should be
promoted for agricultural extension service delivery to realize its full impact. The government has
a role of providing the technical expertise on agricultural issues and as thus should be available
when called upon by other providers. It should serve as the final reference or arbitrator of
conflicting extension information.
40
REFERENCES
Abdalqader, R. A. (2022). International Journal of Agriculture Extension and Social Development.
Aboyeji, C. M., Olaniyan, D. O., Dunsin, O., Adekiya, A. O., Okunlola, F. O., Ejue, S. W., ... &
Adeniyi, H. A. (2021). Physiological growth, yield and quality responses of okra to sole
and combined soil application of green biomass, poultry manure and inorganic
fertilizers. Plant Physiology Reports, 26(4), 709-721. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40502-021-
00628-7
Antwi-Agyei, P., & Stringer, L. C. (2021). Improving the effectiveness of agricultural extension
services in supporting farmers to adapt to climate change: Insights from northeastern
Ghana. Climate Risk Management, 32, 100304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2021.100304
Auya, S., Barasa, F., & Sambu, L. (2022). Land Sub-Division and its Impact on Household Food
Security. Evidence from Nyamira North Sub County, Kenya.
Blanco-Canqui, H., & Ruis, S. J. (2018). No-tillage and soil physical environment. Geoderma, 326,
164-200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.03.011
Dan, V., Osterheider, A., & Raupp, J. (2019). The diffusion of innovations in agricultural circles:
An explorative study on alternative antimicrobial agents. Science Communication, 41(1),
3-37. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547018819159
Danso-Abbeam, G., Ehiakpor, D. S., & Aidoo, R. (2018). Agricultural extension and its effects on
farm productivity and income: insight from Northern Ghana. Agriculture & Food
Security, 7(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-018-0225-x
de Mello, K., Taniwaki, R. H., de Paula, F. R., Valente, R. A., Randhir, T. O., Macedo, D. R., ...
& Hughes, R. M. (2020). Multiscale land use impacts on water quality: Assessment,
planning, and future perspectives in Brazil. Journal of Environmental Management, 270,
110879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110879
Demissie, B., Amsalu, A., Tesfamariam, Z., Nyssen, J., Meaza, H., Asfaha, T. G., ... & Van
Eetvelde, V. (2022). Landscape changes in the semi-closed Raya agricultural graben floor
of Northern Ethiopia. Earth Systems and Environment, 6(2), 453-468.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41748-021-00261-2
Derbile, E. K., Chirawurah, D., & Naab, F. X. (2022). Vulnerability of smallholder agriculture to
environmental change in North-Western Ghana and implications for development
planning. Climate and Development, 14(1), 39-51.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2021.1881423
Elavarasan, D., Vincent, D. R., Sharma, V., Zomaya, A. Y., & Srinivasan, K. (2018). Forecasting
yield by integrating agrarian factors and machine learning models: A survey. Computers
and Electronics in Agriculture, 155, 257-282.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2018.10.024
Enu, P., & Attah-Obeng, P. (2019). Which macro factors influence agricultural production in
Ghana?. Academic Research International, 4(5), 333.
41
Evans, M. M., Samuel, N. N., & Samuel, C. M. (2021). Production of indigenous poultry among
smallholder farmers in Tigania West Meru County, Kenya. African Journal of Agricultural
Research, 17(5), 705-713. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJAR2021.15465
Fadeyi, O. A., Ariyawardana, A., & Aziz, A. A. (2022). Factors influencing technology adoption
among smallholder farmers: a systematic review in Africa.
Garofalo, D. F. T., Novaes, R. M. L., Pazianotto, R. A., Maciel, V. G., Brandão, M., Shimbo, J.
Z., & Folegatti-Matsuura, M. I. (2022). Land-use change CO2 emissions associated with
agricultural products at municipal level in Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production, 364,
132549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132549
Girma, Y. (2022). Credit access and agricultural technology adoption nexus in Ethiopia: A
systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 100362.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2022.100362
Hoang, A. T., Huang, Z., Nižetić, S., Pandey, A., Nguyen, X. P., Luque, R., ... & Le, T. H. (2021).
Characteristics of hydrogen production from steam gasification of plant-originated
lignocellulosic biomass and its prospects in Vietnam. International Journal of Hydrogen
Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.11.091
Hu, W., Drewry, J., Beare, M., Eger, A., & Müller, K. (2021). Compaction induced soil structural
degradation affects productivity and environmental outcomes: a review and New Zealand
case study. Geoderma, 395, 115035. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2021.115035
Hussen, C. H., & Geleta, F. T. (2021). Factors Affecting Smallholder Farmers Participations in
Cluster Crop Production: Evidence from Selected Districts of West Shewa Zone, Oromia
National Regional State, Ethiopia. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 37(3).
https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2021/37.3.818.829
Isidore, M. M., Cisabu, M. C. M., & Murhebwa, M. M. (2018). Education and Agricultural
Productivity in Democratic Republic of Congo: The Case of South-Kivu
Province. International Journal of Elementary Education, 7(1), 7-12.
https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeedu.20180701.12
Jha, K., Doshi, A., Patel, P., & Shah, M. (2019). A comprehensive review on automation in
agriculture using artificial intelligence. Artificial Intelligence in Agriculture, 2, 1-12.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aiia.2019.05.004
Kassem, H. S., Alotaibi, B. A., Muddassir, M., & Herab, A. (2021). Factors influencing farmers’
satisfaction with the quality of agricultural extension services. Evaluation and Program
Planning, 85, 101912. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2021.101912
Khudoynazarovich, K. S. (2021). Economic issues of ensuring economic efficiency in agricultural
production and the use of innovative agricultural technologies. SAARJ Journal on Banking
& Insurance Research, 10(2), 16-22. https://doi.org/10.5958/2319-1422.2021.00011.4
Kogo, B. K., Kumar, L., Koech, R., & Hasan, M. K. (2022). Response to climate change in a rain-
fed crop production system: insights from maize farmers of western Kenya. Mitigation and
Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 27(8), 1-17.
Lavoie, A. L., Dentzman, K., & Wardropper, C. B. (2021). Using diffusion of innovations theory
to understand agricultural producer perspectives on cover cropping in the inland Pacific
42
Northwest, USA. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 36(4), 384-395.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-022-10023-8
Liang, X. Z., Wu, Y., Chambers, R. G., Schmoldt, D. L., Gao, W., Liu, C., ... & Kennedy, J. A.
(2017). Determining climate effects on US total agricultural productivity. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences, 114(12), E2285-E2292.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1615922114
N. Kingiri, A. (2021). Agricultural advisory and extension service approaches and inclusion in
reaching out to Kenyan rural farmers. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation
and Development, 13(7), 797-806. https://doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2020.1823098
Namonje-Kapembwa, T., Chiwawa, H., & Sitko, N. (2022). Analysis of goat production and
marketing among smallholder farmers Zambia. Small Ruminant Research, 208, 106620.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2022.106620
Nyarko, D. A., & Kozári, J. (2021). Information and communication technologies (ICTs) usage
among agricultural extension officers and its impact on extension delivery in
Ghana. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences, 20(3), 164-172.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2021.01.002
Nyinamugisha, J. (2019). Analysis of socioeconomic factors affecting agricultural production in
Uganda: a case of Bagezza sub county, Mubende District (Doctoral dissertation, Makerere
University).
Omache, N. (2016). Factors influencing agricultural productivity in Kenya: A case of Nyathuna
ward in Kabete Sub-County, Kiambu County (Doctoral dissertation, University Of
Nairobi).
Onogwu, G. O., Audu, I. A., & Igbodor, F. O. (2017). Factors influencing agricultural productivity
of smallholder farmers in Taraba State, Nigeria. International Journal of Agriculture
Innovations and Research, 6(1), 114-118.
Osei-Kwasi, H. A., Laar, A., Zotor, F., Pradeilles, R., Aryeetey, R., Green, M., ... & Holdsworth,
M. (2021). The African urban food environment framework for creating healthy nutrition
policy and interventions in urban Africa. Plos one, 16(4), e0249621.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0249621
Pellegrina, H. S. (2022). Trade, productivity, and the spatial organization of agriculture: Evidence
from Brazil. Journal of Development Economics, 156, 102816.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2021.102816
Qader, S. H., Dash, J., Alegana, V. A., Khwarahm, N. R., Tatem, A. J., & Atkinson, P. M. (2021).
The role of earth observation in achieving sustainable agricultural production in arid and
semi-arid regions of the world. Remote Sensing, 13(17), 3382.
https://doi.org/10.3390/rs13173382
Rada, N., Helfand, S., & Magalhães, M. (2019). Agricultural productivity growth in Brazil: Large
and small farms excel. Food policy, 84, 176-185.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2018.03.014
Rogers, E. M., Singhal, A., & Quinlan, M. M. (2014). Diffusion of innovations. In An integrated
approach to communication theory and research (pp. 432-448). Routledge.
43
Ruzzante, S., Labarta, R., & Bilton, A. (2021). Adoption of agricultural technology in the
developing world: a meta-analysis of the empirical literature. World Development, 146,
105599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105599
Sazonova, E., Borisova, V., Terentyev, S., Kramlikh, O., & Sidorenkova, I. (2021). Technologies
for digital modeling of spatial information about the area for agricultural production.
In SHS Web of Conferences (Vol. 93, p. 05007). EDP Sciences.
https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20219305007
Simin, M. T., & Janković, D. (2014). Applicability of diffusion of innovation theory in organic
agriculture. Economics of Agriculture, 61(2), 517-529.
https://doi.org/10.5937/ekoPolj1402517T
Sulandjari, K., Putra, A., Sulaminingsih, S., Adi Cakranegara, P., Yusroni, N., & Andiyan, A.
(2022). Agricultural extension in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic: Issues and
challenges in the field. Caspian Journal of Environmental Sciences, 20(1), 137-143.
Sulandjari, K., Putra, A., Sulaminingsih, S., Adi Cakranegara, P., Yusroni, N., & Andiyan, A.
(2022). Agricultural extension in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic: Issues and
challenges in the field. Caspian Journal of Environmental Sciences, 20(1), 137-143.
Thierfelder, C., & Mhlanga, B. (2022). Short-term yield gains or long-term sustainability?–a
synthesis of Conservation Agriculture long-term experiments in Southern
Africa. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 326, 107812.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2021.107812
Uwamariya, M., Kyule, N. M., & Eric, K. B. (2022). Does access to credit influence the adoption
of good agricultural practices? The case of smallholder potato farmers in Molo Sub-
County, Kenya. Journal of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, 14(1), 24-32.
https://doi.org/10.5897/JAERD2021.1294
Wang, Z., Wang, J., Zhang, G., & Wang, Z. (2021). Evaluation of agricultural extension service
for sustainable agricultural development using a hybrid entropy and TOPSIS
method. Sustainability, 13(1), 347. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010347
44

Factors Impacting Agricultural Production and The Role of Agricultural Extension Services in Kenya

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Factors Impacting Agricultural Production and The Role of Agricultural Extension Services in Kenya

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Factors Impacting Agricultural Production and The Role of Agricultural Extension Services in Kenya

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Factors Impacting Agricultural Production and the Role of Agricultural

Extension Services in Kenya

Dr. Domeniter Naomi Kathula

Factors Impacting Agricultural Production and the Role of

Dr. Domeniter Naomi Kathula

*E-Mail of the Corresponding Author:

1.0 Background to the Study

2.1 Theoretical Framework

Table 1: Factors Impacting Agricultural Production in Kenya

Table 2: Role of Agricultural Extension Services on Agricultural Production

production in Kenya which is attributable to availability and accessibility of agricultural extension

Table 6: Regression Coefficient

Northwest, USA. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 36(4), 384-395.

You might also like