Research Article
Exploring Farmers’ Perception and Constraints on the Adoption of Small-Scale Irrigation in Hulet Eju Enesie District, North-Western Ethiopia
Table 4
Farmers’ perception on relative disadvantage attributes of small-scale irrigation (SSI).
| | List of attributes | Irrigation user samples (N = 82) | Nonuser samples (N = 102) | χ2 | | Distribution of respondents (%) | Distribution of respondents (%) | | SD | D | N | A | SA | Me | SD | D | N | A | SA | Me |
| | Irrigation reduces soil fertility | — | 15 | 30.0 | 51.2 | 2.5 | 3.4 | — | 12.0 | 54.9 | 32.3 | — | 3.1 | 12.92 | | Long bureaucracy to get extension services for irrigation | 10 | 48 | 7.3 | 30.5 | 2.4 | 3.3 | 3.9 | 30 | 23.5 | 39 | 2.9 | 3.2 | 15.5 | | Irrigation is susceptible to production risk | 23 | 52 | 8.5 | 13.4 | 2.4 | 2.1 | 17 | 39 | 16.7 | 21.5 | 4.9 | 2.5 | 7.165 | | Irrigation requires high cost of production | — | — | 6.1 | 87.8 | 6.10 | 4 | — | — | 9.81 | 29.4 | 60.8 | 4.5 | 66.05 | | Irrigation needs some level of skill and Knowledge | — | 2.4 | 21 | 73.1 | 2.44 | 3.7 | — | 1.9 | 31.4 | 65.7 | 0.98 | 3.6 | 2.494 | | Irrigation has negative environmental effect | 4.8 | 63 | 14 | 14.6 | 2.44 | 2.4 | 9.8 | 59 | 20.6 | 6.7 | 2.9 | 2.4 | 5.141 |
|
|
Where; SA = strongly agree, a = agree, N = neutral, D = disagree, SD = strongly disagree. Me = mean score. = Significant at 1% significant level, |
