The study findings show that the main sources of poultry management information were family, friends and neighbours (288, 84.2%), extension officers (162, 47.4%), researchers (53, 15.5%), and radio (26, 7.6%). The findings from the focus group discussions confirmed that family, friends, neighbours and extension officers were the main sources of poultry management information. The least used sources of information were mobile phones, television, the Internet, and drama. Printed sources of information such as posters, leaflets, newspapers and books were only slightly used (See Section 5.5.1). This calls for information providers to identify the appropriate channels to use for dissemination of information to rural communities, in order for information to reach target beneficiaries. The over-reliance on family, friends and neighbours for information is a very worrying trend, particularly since those providing information are also dependent on the same sources.
It is evident from the study findings that farmers relied on interpersonal and informal sources of information. The findings also indicate that modern sources of information such as television and cell phones were not regarded as important sources of information. Similar findings were reported by other related studies (Lwoga, Ngulube & Stilwell, 2010; Njoku, 2004; Elly & Silayo, 2013; Okwu & Daudu, 2011; Ugboma, 2010; Daudu, Chado & Igbashal, 2009; Boz & Ozcatalbas, 2010) in developing countries. The findings of this and previous studies show that farmers relied on interpersonal and informal sources of information, such as family, friends and neighbours, extension officers, and village leaders. The findings are supported by Aina
150
(2004:17), who asserts that “when the need for information is for problem solving, the user approaches informal channels such as colleagues, friends, neighbours, family, chiefs, a religious body, the neighbourhood or a professional association”. While Garforth, Khatiwada and Campbell (2003) reported that neighbours were a very important source of information among farmers, a different observation was made by Opara (2008), who found that neighbours and friends were not the main information sources. Extension officers and radio were the main information sources for farmers in Imo State, Nigeria. This variation in the study findings may be due to the social, economic, cultural and political differences of the study areas.
The study findings regarding the use of radio were inconsistent with previous studies. A study by Chilimo, Ngulube and Stilwell (2011) found that radio was the major source of information for people in selected rural areas of Tanzania. A study by Mtega (2012) reported that radio was the main source of agricultural information in Kilosa district. The possible reasons for this difference may be the geographical locations of the study areas, economic development of the surveyed communities, and variation in agricultural activities. Likewise, Mtega (2012) reported that there was a community radio station in the study area, which might have influenced farmers’ choices. The low use of radio in this study could be attributed to the unavailability of a community radio station in surveyed communities. Farmers may be discouraged from listening to radio stations from urban areas because the information that is broadcasted is not context-specific.
Furthermore, the findings highlighted the fact that print sources (books, leaflets, posters and newspapers) were sparingly used. The limited level of education, cost of acquiring print materials, lack of libraries or information centres, and unavailability of print materials in the rural areas may have hindered farmers from using these sources. Despite the challenges, farmers consulted the print sources to access information. Similar findings were reported on farmers’ use of print sources of information by other studies (Garforth, 2001; Stefano et al., 2005; Lwoga, Ngulube & Stilwell, 2010). Most of the publishing houses in Tanzania are located in urban areas. In such a situation, print information materials are prepared in the urban areas and transported to the rural areas for distribution. Most of the rural areas in Tanzania have a poor road infrastructure, which limits the transport services. Due to poor transport services to the rural areas, most of the print sources do not reach the rural communities on time. Even when the print
151
information materials reach the rural communities, the cost becomes higher, mainly because of transportation. It is obvious that this kind of information becomes expensive for the rural farmers with a low income, which only a few farmers can afford.
Again, the findings show that modern information sources (cell phones, Internet, and television) were the least used. Similar findings were reported by Elly and Silayo (2013), who found that modern means of communication were not considered to be important sources of agricultural information. This is probably because of limited ICT infrastructure, lack of ICT skills and lack of electricity in rural areas, which limit the availability and accessibility of modern communication technologies. However, it was observed that there were five mobile operators with the infrastructure to cover the surveyed communities, and some of the farmers owned mobile phones. Television frequencies were also available in the study area, but very few people owned a television. Despite the availability of mobile and television infrastructure in the area, the biggest challenge was lack of electricity to charge mobiles phones and operate televisions. Sife, Kiondo and Lyimo-Macha (2010) found that farmers used cell phones to access market information for agriculture and livestock products. Elly and Silayo (2013) reported that farmers found television to be irrelevant because very few agricultural information sessions were televised, and most of the televised information was too general to satisfy their local needs. This calls for responsible agents to deliver context-specific information through modern information sources, so that farmers can access timely and current information to satisfy their needs.
It was evident from the study findings that there were variations in the information sources used in terms of educational levels. However, there were no differences in terms of gender, age and occupational categories. The findings revealed that printed sources were used more by farmers with a higher education level (secondary education and beyond). Farmers with limited education (primary education, informal education and illiterate) accessed information through researchers, neighbours and extension officers. There was very minimal use of digital sources of information, and it was therefore not necessary to draw comparisons on their use. Nevertheless, there were no variations in terms of the use of radio across all demographic characteristics. The findings suggest that educational level has an influence on the choice of information sources by farmers.
152
However, information providers are also challenged to package the information in ways that are able to attract farmers to digital media, which are a phenomenon of the current century.