Cross-sectional research highlights effectiveness and barriers in agricultural extension services, suggesting improvements.
This study examined the practical delivery, effectiveness, and challenges of Agricultural Extension Services (AES) in Shashemene Woreda, with particular attention to both the milestones achieved and the persistent constraints encountered by local farming communities. A cross sectional research design guided the investigation, and data were gathered from 130 households situated across three distinct agroecological zones, lowland, midland, and highland ensuring a comprehensive representation of farming conditions and lived experiences. The findings illuminated a youthful farming population, with 78.23 percent of respondents aged below forty, reflecting strong potential for innovation and adaptability. Nonetheless, a pronounced gender imbalance became evident, as men constituted 72.31 percent of participants, suggesting the continued underrepresentation of women in agricultural service engagement and leadership. Educational deficiencies emerged as a significant barrier, with 36.92 percent of respondents unable to read or write, which limited their capacity to assimilate and implement improved agricultural methods. Despite the presence of AES, only 17.69 percent of farmers had reported adopting enhanced practices in their day to day farming activities. Moreover, the majority, 58.46 percent, perceived the services as largely ineffective in addressing their practical needs. Financial hardship stood out as the most prominent challenge, reported by 40.76 percent of respondents, followed by limited technical support (26.94 percent) and restrictive policy environments (18.46 percent). Furthermore, only 22.31 percent of the farmers indicated awareness of or access to market value chain opportunities, which further constrained economic progress. These insights underscored an urgent need for inclusive, contextually grounded strategies that could elevate the impact of AES through enhanced farmer education, gender empowerment, resource mobilization, and improved market connectivity, thus fostering more resilient and sustainable rural livelihoods.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tusa et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: