Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BACKGROUND: In homestead food production (HFP) programs, village model farmers (VMFs), after training, implement agriculture and nutrition activities to improve household knowledge and practices. Little evidence exists on what enables VMFs to remain actively engaged and for impacts to be sustained. OBJECTIVE: To examine variables explaining active engagement of VMFs, at least 4 years post-training, in an HFP program in Nepal. We assessed whether respondents registered their HFP group with the local government, conducted regular group meetings, discussed vegetable growing and chicken rearing practices with group members, or engaged in saving and credit activities in their HFP group. Outcome variable was a count of these 4 activities in which the VMF engaged. Socioeconomic, demographic, and programmatic explanatory variables were identified a priori and by bivariate analysis and were adjusted in ordinal regression models accounting for clusters. RESULTS: On average, VMFs engaged in 1.4 activities. Having attended primary or secondary school (adjusted odds ratios [AOR] = 1.39), being a female community health volunteer (AOR = 1.27), being from an advantaged caste/ethnic group (AOR = 1.34), receiving additional trainings (AOR = 1.56) and inputs (AOR = 1.31) were associated with more active engagement of VMFs. CONCLUSION: Village model farmers receiving more training and inputs were more likely to remain actively engaged. Female community health workers, people from higher caste/ethnic groups, and those with primary or secondary education were more likely to remain active VMFs and could be targeted for this role in HFP programs leading to sustained impact.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bhandari et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: