Refine your search
Co-Authors
Journals
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z All
Singh, Premlata
- Agriculture Scientists Perceptions about Climate Change and its Impacts on Agriculture
Abstract Views :502 |
PDF Views:0
Authors
Affiliations
1 Department of Agricultural Extension, Division of Agricultural Extension, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa, New Delhi, IN
1 Department of Agricultural Extension, Division of Agricultural Extension, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa, New Delhi, IN
Source
International Journal of Agricultural Sciences, Vol 9, No 2 (2013), Pagination: 653-658Abstract
This investigation was aimed at assessing agricultural scientists' perceptions regarding climate change in the context of agriculture. The study was conducted in MPKV, Rahuri and DBSKKV, Dapoli agricultural universities and random sampling procedure was followed in selection of respondent scientists and total sample size was 60. Agricultural scientists' perceptions were assessed through a summative rating scale which consisted of five dimensions: scientific understanding of climate change, its causes, changes in climatic parameters, impacts on agriculture and adaptation and mitigation strategies to climate change in agriculture. During the investigation, significant and positive relationship was observed between age, education, professional experience, information sources accessed and the trustworthiness of the information source. Regression analysis indicated that work experience and source of information were high predictors of climate change science consistent perceptions and 37 per cent of the variance in climate change perceptions was explained by the regression model.Keywords
Perception, Climate Change, Agricultural Scientists
- How do the Stakeholders Perceive Plant Variety Protection in Indian Seed Sector?
Abstract Views :236 |
PDF Views:83
Authors
Affiliations
1 Division of Agricultural Economics, ICAR–Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa Campus, New Delhi 110 012, IN
2 Division of Agricultural Extension, ICAR–Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa Campus, New Delhi 110 012, IN
1 Division of Agricultural Economics, ICAR–Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa Campus, New Delhi 110 012, IN
2 Division of Agricultural Extension, ICAR–Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa Campus, New Delhi 110 012, IN
Source
Current Science, Vol 110, No 12 (2016), Pagination: 2239-2244Abstract
Creativity and innovation are important factors for sustainable agricultural growth. Intellectual property rights (IPR) is the key driver of innovation. However, many argue against this view, as it would benefit only a certain section in a country. The present study analyses the perception of stakeholders on Indian IPR system for plant varieties. A perception survey was conducted among various stakeholders of the seed industry across the country during 2011-12. Contrary to the view that IPR plays no role in innovation, this study finds a positive perception of majority of stakeholders on plant variety protection (PVP), while highlighting the hits and misses of Indian PVP.Keywords
Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation, Perception, Plant Varieties, Stakeholder.Full Text
- Determinants of Research Productivity of Agricultural Scientists: Implications for the National Agricultural Research and Education System of India
Abstract Views :238 |
PDF Views:76
Authors
Affiliations
1 ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, IN
2 Krishi Anusandhan Bhawan-I, New Delhi 110 012, IN
1 ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, IN
2 Krishi Anusandhan Bhawan-I, New Delhi 110 012, IN
Source
Current Science, Vol 112, No 02 (2017), Pagination: 252-257Abstract
A micro level analysis for understanding the major determinants of research productivity of individual scientists in the National Agricultural Research and Education System of India was undertaken. A sample of two hundred scientists was drawn through multistage disproportionate stratified random sampling from a high performing and a low performing agricultural institute in India. Forced choice Q-sort technique was employed to record perception of respondents regarding relative influence exerted by selected variables on their research productivity and a factor analysis using principal component method with varimax rotation helped in extracting 11 major factors determining research productivity of agricultural scientists, namely, organizational research environment, creativity, perseverance and commitment, research facility, ability to work under constraint, incentive policy, proactiveness, purpose-driven orientation, achievement motivation, involvement in teaching and job satisfaction. The apparent uniformity in percentage variance contribution of these 11 factors implies that optimum research productivity of scientists can only be harnessed when personal and organizational factors work in harmony.Keywords
Agriculture, Determinants, Productivity, Research, Scientists.Full Text
- Constraints Experienced by Agricultural Scientists and Extension Personnel in Rice Knowledge Management and Delivery:A Case of Rice Knowledge Management Portal (RKMP)
Abstract Views :333 |
PDF Views:135
Authors
Affiliations
1 Division of Agricultural Extension, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, IN
2 ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, IN
1 Division of Agricultural Extension, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, IN
2 ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, IN
Source
Indian Journal of Economics and Development, Vol 5, No 11 (2017), Pagination: 1-8Abstract
Objectives: To study the constraints experienced by agricultural scientists and extension personnel in utilising and accessing information related to rice from Rice Knowledge Management Portal (RKMP).
Methods/Statistical Analysis: The research was conducted in purposively selected districts and simple random sampling technique was used to select the respondents. Ex-post facto research design was used; Different categories of constraints were collected through literature review, expert opinion. Data was collected using semi structured interview schedule. A three point continuum of severity using LIKERT type scale was used for getting responses. Friedman’s test was used to finding most important constraint within each group.
Findings: Agricultural scientists and extension personnel faced technological, social, economical and psychological constraints more severely. In case of technological constraints, lack of updated information, technical and infrastructure problems while using ICTs and poor maintenance of ICT tools were major constraints that agricultural scientists and extension personnel have faced. In case of social constraints, restriction to promote organisational information and less networking among extension personnel were found most limiting factors for using portal’s information. In case of psychological factors benefits given to particular group of people was found most severe and techno-phobia was found least affecting to respondents for utilising information. In case of economical constraints, high cost of internet and cost of computer/smart phones were limiting the use of information provided by RKMP.
Application/Improvements: The finding will help in restructuring and incorporating necessary modification for reaching the unreached for effective dissemination of information and making portal more effective for users to ensure timely and relevant information.
Keywords
Constraints, Technological, Social, Economical, Psychological, Friedman Test.Full Text
References
- A. Carneiro. How does knowledge management influence innovation and competitiveness? Journal of Knowledge Management. 2000 Jun; 4(2), 87-98.
- R.K. Rai. Knowledge management and organizational culture: a theoretical integrative framework. Journal of Knowledge Management. 2011 Sep, 5(5), 779-801.
- R. Syiem, S. Raj. Access and Usage of ICTs for Agriculture and Rural Development by the tribal farmers in Meghalaya State of North-East India. Journal of Agricultural Informatics. 2015; 6(3), 24-41.
- A. Kelles-Viitanen. The role of ICT in poverty reduction. The Finnish Economy and Society.2003, 82-94.
- V. Sangeetha, R.R. Burman, S.K. Dubey, J.P. Sharma, I. Singh. Attitude of agricultural stakeholders on use of Short Message Service (SMS) in transfer of technology. Indian Journal of Extension Education. 2015; 51, 60-65.
- A. Mathur, M. Goyal. Role of information technology in Indian agriculture. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research. 2014; 9(10), 1193-1198.
- S.N. Meera, A. Jhamtani, D.U.M. Rao. Information and communication technology in agricultural development: A comparative analysis of three projects from India. Agricultural Research and Extension Network. 2004; 1-13.
- K. Yadav, R.V. Sulaiman, N.T. Yaduraju, V. Balaji, T.V. Prabhakar. ICTs in knowledge management: the case of the Agropedia platform for Indian agriculture. Knowledge Management for Development Journal. 2015; 11(2), 5-22.
- M. Alavi, D.E. Leidner. Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS quarterly. 2001; 107-136.
- L.P. Tan, K.Y. Wong. Linkage between knowledge management and manufacturing performance: a structural equation modelling approach. Journal of knowledge management. 2015; 19(4), 814-835.
- L. Karadsheh, E. Mansour, S. Alhawari, G. Azar, N. El-Bathy. A theoretical framework for knowledge management process: towards improving knowledge performance. Communications of the IBIMA. 2009 Feb; 7, 67-79.
- S. Mondal. Text book of agricultural extension with global innovations. Kalyani Publishers. New Delhi. 2013.
- J. Chatterjee, T.V. Prabhakar. On to action–building a digital ecosystem for knowledge diffusion in rural India. WP 7: Community Networks and Digital Ecosystems. 2008, 1-11.
- V. Venkatasubramanian, P. Mahalakshmi. Innovative institutional approaches for Agricultural Knowledge System Management in India. Improving Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems. 2012 Feb, 131-150.
- V.R. Sulaiman, A. Hall, N.J. Kalaivani, K. Dorai, T.V. Reddy. Necessary, but not sufficient: Critiquing the role of information and communication technology in putting knowledge into use. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension. 2012 Aug, 18(4), 331-346.
- V. Balaji. The fate of agriculture. In Seminar Magazine. 2009 Jun, 597.
- V.C. Patil, L.B. Hugar, P. Priya, A. Prabhuraj, V. Balaji, N.T. Yaduraj. Information and communication technologies for agriculture knowledge management in India. World Applied Sciences Journal. 2011; 14(5), 794-802.
- D.R. Das, P.S. Pandey, A.K. Mishra, S.N. Meera. Rice Knowledge Management Portal for Technology Dissemination: A Case Study for Haryana, Punjab and Uttarakhand States. Indian Journal of Extension Education. 2013; 49(1and2), 88-92.
- Shaik N. Meera, GAK Kumar, PS Pandey, S Arun Kumar and BC Viraktamath. Empowering farmers through Rice Knowledge Management Portal in India. Agricultural Information and Knowledge for All: Success Stories on ICT/ICM in the Asia-Pacific Region. Asia-Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institutions (APAARI). FAO Regional Office for Asia & the Pacific. Bangkok. 2012. pp.35
- I. Faisal. Institutionalization of Agricultural Knowledge Management System for Digital Marginalized Rural Farming Community. In ISDA. 2010 Jun.
- R. Balakrishnan, M. Wason, R.N. Padaria, P. Singh, E. Varghese. An analysis of constraints in e-learning and strategies for promoting e-learning among farmers. Economic Affairs. 2014 Jul; 59, 1-727.
- Afroz S. Effectiveness of participatory video in dissemination of farm technology: A case of digital green. Doctoral dissertation, IARI, Divisionof Agricultural Extension, New Delhi, 2013.
- V. Balaji, N. Meera, S. Dixit. ICT-enabled knowledge sharing in support of extension: addressing the agrarian challenges of the developing world threatened by climate change, with a case study from India. Journal of SAT Agricultural Research. 2007; 4(1), 1-8.
- I.A. Akpabio, D.P. Okon, E.B. Inyang. Constraints affecting ICT utilization by agricultural extension officers in the Niger Delta, Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension.2007 Dec,; 13(4), 263-272.
- T.O. Banmeke, M.T. Ajayi. Farmers’ perception of the agricultural information resource centre at ago-are, Oyo State, Nigeria. Editorial Board. 2008; 1(1), 22-29.
- A.O. Ajayi, O.S. Alabi, T.O. Akinsola. Knowledge and perception of extension agents on information and communication technologies (ICTs) use in extension service delivery in on do State, Nigeria. African Journal of Agricultural Research. 2013 Dec, 8(48), 6226-6233.
- C.O. Albert. Constraints to effective use of ICT among extension professionals and farmers in extension delivery in Rivers State, Nigeria. Singaporean Journal of Business, Economics and Management Studies. 2014 Jun; 2(11), 136-142.
- E.N. Cynthia, T.S. Nwabugwu. Challenges to Adoption of ICT Tools by Agricultural Extension Workers in Anambra State, Nigeria. Asian Journal of Agricultural Extension, Economics & Sociology. 2016. 10(4), 1-6.
- A.E. Agwu, U.C. Uche-Mba, O.M. Akinnagbe. Use of information communication technologies (ICTs) among researchers, extension workers and farmers in Abia and Enugu states: Implications for a National Agricultural Extension Policy on ICTs. Journal of Agricultural Extension. 2008; 12(1).
- Nutritional Security Vis-A-Vis Food Production in India:The Strength of Agri-Nutri Linkage in Retrospect
Abstract Views :399 |
PDF Views:81
Authors
Affiliations
1 Division of Agricultural Extension, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, IN
1 Division of Agricultural Extension, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, IN
Source
Current Science, Vol 114, No 03 (2018), Pagination: 439-441Abstract
India, the largest producer of milk, wheat and fruits, and the second largest producer of rice, pulses and vegetables in the world, with 194 million undernourished people, tops the ‘world hunger list’ as well. It is astonishing to find that the nation has failed to achieve both Millennium Development Goal (MDG) and World Food Summit (WFS) targets, despite consistently high agricultural production over the years and a promisingly higher rate of economic growth. This failure is inconceivable in the sense that the country still has a farming population of around 54% of the total, and has made great strides towards achieving ‘self-sufficiency’ in food production.Full Text
References
- FAOSTAT, Food and agricultural commodities production, 2012; http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx (retrieved on 2 August 2016).
- FAO, IFAD and WFP, The state of food insecurity in the world 2015, meeting the 2015 international hunger targets: taking stock of uneven progress, FAO, Rome, 2015.
- Sahu, S. K., Kumar, S. G., Bhat, B. V., Premarajan, K. C., Sarkar, S., Roy, G. and Joseph, N., J. Nat. Sci. Biol. Med., 2015, 6, 18–23.
- Government of India (GoI), Agricultural Statistics at a Glance, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare, Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmer’s Welfare, 2014; http://eands.dacnet.nic.in/PDF/Agricultural-Statistics-At-Glance2014.pdf (retrieved on 2 August 2016).
- GoI, Clinical, Anthropometric and Biochemical Survey, National Health Survey, 2014; http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011census/hh-series/cab.html (retrieved on 3 August 2016).
- GoI, Population Census, 2011; http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011common/census_2011.html (retrieved on 3 August 2016).
- CSO, Manual on Health Statistics in India, Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, GoI, 2015; http://mospi.nic.in/mospi_new/upload/Manual-Health-Statistics_5june15.pdf (retrieved on 3 August 2016).
- Prasad, J. B., Kumar, M. and Singh, M., Int. J. Human Soc. Sci. Invent., 2015, 4(1), 30–38.
- Parappurathu, S., Kumar, A., Bantilan, M. C. S. and Joshi, P. K., Food Security, 2015, 7, 1031; doi:10.1007/s12571-0150493-2.
- Gupta, A., Int. J. Sci. Res., 2016, 5(4), 482–483.
- Chakravarty, A., Adv. Econ. Bus., 2015, 3(7), 261–271.
- Nagarajan, S., Bhavani, R. V. and Swaminathan, M. S., Curr. Sci., 2014, 107(6), 959–964.
- Shetty, P., Curr. Sci., 2015, 109(3), 456–461.
- Loladze, I., Trends Ecol. Evol., 2002, 17(10), 457–461.
- Gender Sensitivity in Agricultural Extension
Abstract Views :295 |
PDF Views:84
Authors
Affiliations
1 ICAR-CRIDA, Hyderabad 500 059, IN
2 Division of Agricultural Extension, ICAR-IARI, New Delhi 110012, IN
1 ICAR-CRIDA, Hyderabad 500 059, IN
2 Division of Agricultural Extension, ICAR-IARI, New Delhi 110012, IN
Source
Current Science, Vol 115, No 6 (2018), Pagination: 1035-1036Abstract
Agriculture is the mainstay of the global economy and women play a significant role in the sustainable development of the economy. They contribute in agricultural activities often at par with men by justifying the ancient African proverb ‘without women we all go hungry’. Women play the main role in agriculture from manually growing crops to agroprocessing to homemaking. More than half of the world’s food is grown by women, but worldwide her hard work has been unpaid1. Most of the time their inputs are less recognized, their importance and contributions are never acknowledged, because their service does not contribute enough in the direct material income2,3.Full Text
References
- Dankelman, I. and Davidson, J., Women and the Environment in the Third World: Alliance for the Future, Routledge, 2013.
- Fletschner, D. and Kenney, L., In Gender in Agriculture, Springer, Dordrecht, 2014, pp. 187–208.
- Sharma, K. C. and Devi, L., Econ. Aff., 2014, 59(4), 687.
- Kelkar, G., Econ. Polit. Wkly, 2011, 46(23), 59–68.
- Census of India, Provisional Population Totals, Government of India, New Delhi, 2011.
- Aarnink, N. and Kingma, K., Female farmers and male extension workers: Women and agriculture in Tanzania II. Women and Autonomy Centre, Leiden University, Leiden, 1991.
- Jiggins, J. R., Samanta, K. and Olawoye, J. E., Improving Agricultural Extension a Reference Manual, 1997, pp. 73–80.
- Swanson, B. E. and Rajalahti, R., Strengthening agricultural extension and advisory systems, 2010.
- World Bank/FAO/IFAD, Gender and Agricultural Markets. (Module prepared by Farnworth, K. and Ragaza, C.). In Gender in Agricultural Livelihoods Sourcebook, Washington, DC, 2009.
- Lahai, B. A. N., Goldey, P. and Jones, G. E., J. Agric. Edu. Ext., 2000, 6(4).
- UNDP and UNIFEM, A user’s guide to measuring gender-sensitive basic service delivery, UNDP and UNIFEM, New York, 2009.
- Ibrahim, S., Mainstreaming gender in development projects in Middle East and North Africa: lessons learned and success stories, IDRC, 2009.
- Thanh, N. C. and Singh, B., Omairice, 2007, 15, 164–173.
- World Bank and IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute), Gender and governance in rural services: insights from India, Ghana, and Ethiopia. Gender and Governance Author Team. International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/ World Bank, Washington, DC, 2010.
- Quisumbing, A. R. and Pandolfelli, L., World Dev., 2010, 38(4), 581–592.
- Directorate of Research on Women in Agriculture (DRWA), Vision 2050, Bhubaneswar, India, 2011.
- DANIDA, Farm Women in Development: Impact Study of Four Training Projects in India. Denmark: Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2004.
- Why Challenges of Doubling Farmers’ Income by 2022 are Acceptable in Context of the Present Indian Agricultural Scenario
Abstract Views :233 |
PDF Views:82
Authors
Affiliations
1 ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, IN
1 ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, IN
Source
Current Science, Vol 116, No 8 (2019), Pagination: 1287-1288Abstract
The earlier strategies for agricultural development in our country focused primarily on enhancing agricultural production and food security. The policies largely emphasized on increase in agricultural productivity through latest technologies and cultivars, and augmented use of quality seeds, agrochemicals and plant nutrients. Those approaches transformed India not only as food selfsufficient at the national level, but also as one of the leading food-exporting countries at the global level; though it did not explicitly recognize the need to increase farmers’ income and never identified any direct means to support the welfare of farmers. Past experiences show that although growth in production enhances farmers’ income in some cases, in most others, it does not enhance with output. The net result is the stagnating farmers’ income, which is evident from the increasing poverty among rural households. The National Sample Survey Office (NSSO) survey data on consumption expenditure for the year 2011–12 revealed that one-fifth of rural households whose main occupation is agriculture fall below poverty line. Furthermore, farming occupation fetched income which is less than non-farm workers. This discrepancy is large and needs a policy strategy to enhance farmers’ income at a profitable rate. It could be achieved in two ways, i.e. increase in producers’ share in consumers’ rupees, and reduction in the number of farmers to share their total income.Full Text
References
- Chand, R. and Parapappurathu, S., Econ. Polit. Wkly, 2013, 47(26), 55–63.
- Chand, R., In Proceedings of the 23rd Dr B. P. Pal Memorial Lecture, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, 2016.
- Gulati, A. and Sweta Saini, In Proceedings of Foundation Seminar on Doubling Farmers’ Income by National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, Vigyan Bhavan, New Delhi, 12 July 2016.
- Department of Agriculture and Cooperation (DAC) Report, Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare; http://agricoop.gov.in/sites/default/files/DFI%20Volume%202.pdf
- SFAC, Krishi Sutra 2: Success Stories of Farmers’ Producers Organizations, Small Farmers Agri-business Consortium, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi, 2013; http://sfacindia.com/ PDFs/Krishi-Sutra(Version2).pdf
- Wang, L. et al., Economic research report: United States Department of Agricultural Economic Research Service, 2015; https:// www.ers.usda.gov.data-products/international-agricultural-productivity/aspx
- NIAP Annual Report, Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi, 2016, pp. 7–19; http://www.ncap.res.in/upload_files/annual_report/2016-17.pdf
- Padmanaban, G., Curr. Sci., 2018, 114(12), 2432–2433.