Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Research Articles

Vol. 12 No. 3 (2025)

Farmers’ perception of the effectiveness of advisory services provided by input dealers in Andhra Pradesh

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.8779
Submitted
9 April 2025
Published
24-07-2025 — Updated on 31-07-2025
Versions

Abstract

Agriculture is the cornerstone of the economies of many developing countries with a large proportion of the population relying on farming as their primary livelihood. Many farmers struggle to access timely and accurate agricultural information, especially regarding inputs like seeds, fertilizers and pesticides. Public extension services often fall short, making input dealers a crucial source of advice. This study examines the effectiveness of advisory services provided by input dealers in the Kurnool and Anantapur districts of Andhra Pradesh, India, focusing on farmers’ perceptions and the factors influencing those perceptions. A sample of 120 farmers was selected using simple random sampling in the study area. Data were collected through a structured interview schedule and responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Chi-square tests. Most of the farmers perceived that input dealers advisory services were moderately effective (50 %). The results indicate that farmers’ value input dealers advisory services mainly for their practical outcomes like yield maximization, pest control and enhancement in profitability. Key factors affecting farmers’ perception on the effectiveness of input dealers advisory services were economic motivation, innovativeness, information seeking behavior, annual income and farm size. This study underscores the importance of input dealers offering customized, high quality advisory services that align with farmers specific needs and economic objectives, ultimately fostering better agricultural practices and stronger dealer farmer relationships.

References

  1. 1. Demi SM, Sicchia SR. Agrochemicals use practices and health challenges of smallholder farmers in Ghana. Environ Health Insights. 2021;15. https://doi.org/10.1177/11786302211043033
  2. 2. National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO). Key indicators of situation of agricultural households in India. National Sample Survey 70th Round. Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, Government of India, New Delhi; 2014.
  3. 3. Latha MC, Kadian KS, Meena BS, Behera J. Impact of DAESI program on knowledge levels of input dealers in Andhra Pradesh, India. IJEE. 2022;57(2):82-6. https://doi.org/10.5958/2454-552X.2021.00062.1
  4. 4. World Bank. Input supply finance. Technical summary. Working paper; 2017.
  5. 5. Shelake PS, Chikale NJ, Deshmukh AN, Bhosale SR. Training need of agricultural input dealers for transfer of technology. Agric Update. 2015;10(2):105-8. https://doi.org/10.15740/HAS/AU/10.2/105-108
  6. 6. Memuna M, Mattah PA, Mattah DA, Futagbi G. Pesticide application among farmers in the catchment of Ashaiman irrigation scheme: health implications. J Environ Public Health. 2015;2015:547272. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/547272
  7. 7. Elakiyya S, Ashokan M. Role and performance of agri-input dealers in extension services in Coimbatore district of Tamil Nadu, India. J Appl Nat Sci. 2021;13(SI):156-61. https://doi.org/10.31018/jans.v13iSI.2819
  8. 8. Reddy UKK, Gopal PVS, Sailaja V, Prasad SV. Role of agri-input dealers in transfer of technology. IJCMAS. 2019;8(2):2383-8. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.802.277
  9. 9. Dar MH, Janvry AD, Emerick K, Sadoulet E, Wiseman E. Private input suppliers as information agents for technology adoption in agriculture. AEJ Appl Econ. 2024;16(2):219-48. https://doi.org/10.1257/app.20220037
  10. 10. Sulaiman R, Hall A. Beyond technology dissemination: reframing the role of agricultural extension. Dev Policy Rev. 2002;20(4):411-28. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-7632.00116
  11. 11. Pant B, Rathi A, Rathi A. Effectiveness of crop advisory services in Aurangabad district of Maharashtra in India. IJAMAD. 2012;2(4):263-9. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.246091
  12. 12. Mishuk PS. Effectiveness of Department of Agricultural Extension (DAE) regarding agricultural advisory services [Master’s Thesis]. Dhaka (Bangladesh): Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University; 2020.
  13. 13. Kassie M, Zikhali P. Farmers' perceptions of climate change and their adaptation strategies: evidence from Ethiopia. Environ Econ Policy. 2010;12(1):61-82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10018-010-0020-x
  14. 14. Turyahikayo W, Kamagara E. Trust, perception and effectiveness of extension services in Uganda: a case of National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS). J Agric Ext Rural Dev. 2016;8(11):224-31. http://doi.org/10.5897/JAERD2016.0806
  15. 15. Dunne A, Markey A, Kinsella J. Examining the reach of public and private agricultural advisory services and farmers’ perceptions of their quality: the case of County Laois in Ireland. JAEE. 2019;25(5):401-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2019.1643746
  16. 16. Ramesh P, Govind S, Vengatesan D. Factors influencing effectiveness of private extension service in sugarcane cultivation. J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2019;SP2:344-6.
  17. 17. Verma T, Sharma G. Socio-economic, communication and psychological characteristics of the farmers using mobile based agro-advisory services. AJAEES. 2022;40(3):9-15. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajaees/2022/v40i330853
  18. 18. Arun Kumar G, Jansirani R, Asokhan M, Sudhamini Yedida. Study on information seeking behaviour among the farmers of different cropping system of Tamil Nadu. AJAEES. 2022;40(10):1056-60. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajaees/2022/v40i1031178
  19. 19. Borah A, Barman S, Gogoi R, Barman I. A study on effectiveness of advisory services rendered by agro-input dealers in Jorhat district, Assam. IJCMAS. 2021;10(08):42-50. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2021.1008.006
  20. 20. Kath S, Mezhatsu R. Perception of farmers towards mobile based extension agro advisory services in Nagaland, India. J Ext Educ. 2023;34(2):6831-4. https://doi.org/10.26725/JEE.2022.2.34.6831-6834
  21. 21. Spurk C, Koch C, Burgin R, Chikopela L, Konate F, Nyabuga G. Farmers innovativeness and positive affirmation as main drivers of adoption of soil fertility management practices: evidence across sites in Africa. J Agric Educ Ext. 2022;31(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2023.2281909
  22. 22. Okyere A, Babu S, Glendenning CJ. Review of agricultural extension in India: are farmers' information needs being met? IFPRI Discussion Papers 1048. International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI); 2010.
  23. 23. Mahapatra RK. Information seeking behavior and its role in the effectiveness of extension services in Odisha. SRELS JIM. 2016;53(2):117-25. https://doi.org/10.17821/srels/2016/v53i1/86764
  24. 24. Kaseem H, Alotaibi BA, Muddassir M, Herab A. Factors influencing farmers’ satisfaction with the quality of agricultural extension services. Eval Program Plan. 2021;85(3):101912. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2021.101912
  25. 25. Komba NC, Mlozi MR, Mvena ZS. Socio-economic factors influencing farmers’ perception on effectiveness of decentralized agricultural extension information and services delivery in Arumeru District, Tanzania. IJAERD. 2018;6(2):594-602.
  26. 26. Maake M, Antwi MA. Farmer’s perceptions of effectiveness of public agricultural extension services in South Africa: an exploratory analysis of associated factors. Agric Food Secur. 2022;11(1):34. http://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-022-00372-7
  27. 27. Manasa K, Jirli B, Sidharth S, Saifuddin MD, Surya KT. Assessing agricultural input dealers’ constraints and farmers’ perception of services through SERVPERF model analysis. Agric Sci Dig. 2025:1-8. https://doi.org/10.18805/ag.D-6201

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.