This study examined farmers perceptions on subsidized fertilizer distribution mechanisms and agricultural extension services in Western Kenya. It sought to determine how the technical guidance influenced the fertilizer use efficiency and system-level obstacles to fair access to inputs. A cross-sectional design and multi-stage sampling were used to survey 480 smallholder rice farmers across rain-fed and irrigated ecosystems in Kisumu and Busia counties between July and October 2024. Structured questionnaires were used in capturing primary data while Secondary data was collected from 13 key informants, including governmental and non-governmental institutions. Data envelopment analysis (DEA), and stochastic frontier analysis (SFA) were employed in analyzing the efficiency of distribution systems and extension services. Findings revealed that 71% of farmers cited corruption in fertilizer distribution, 54% lacked access to subsidized inputs, and others reported inflation (40%) and hoarding (41%). Regarding extension services, 62% had no extension contact, and 43% were advised only once per year. Adoption of new rice varieties was high (72%), only 45% improved post-harvest practices. There was strong support for cooperative-led solutions: group-based input distribution (84%), farmer representation (93%), and bulk purchasing (73%). However, demand-driven extension was perceived as costly (72%) and confusing (63%). Fragmented extension systems and inequitable input distribution were key barriers to fertilizer utilization. The study recommends policy reforms to address corruption, strengthen farmer cooperatives, and promote integrated extension models. Adoption of hybrid extension approaches and technology-driven input systems will be vital in enhancing efficiency and equity in Kenya’s rice sector.
Okech et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: