IMPACT OF SELECTED AGRICULTURAL r SCHEMES ON THE INNOVATION PATTERNS AMONG TRADITIONAL FARMERS IN THE SOUTHERN SAVANNA OF GHANA Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ROSS EDGAR BIGELOW ‘ 1973 IIIIIJIIIIIIIIIIIII Dr} erf-I!’ ' 4—-I _1. w— v This is to certify that the thesis entitled CTLu ALRICLLTLI‘LAL SSHEIEE) (.51 TH: TTE IVS ASILI‘IG sz‘AoITlCIx/«L FAwia-Eib SL' “TI-LAN SAVAf-AJA CF GHANA IRE/«CT CF {BEL IMICV—XTICIN F I» Tut? 0‘ Ilrs. presented by RG83 Edgar Bigelow has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for FIT.) y! )W A“ Pro cf :SLr Jahn h. Hunter degree inG Major professor C DateE (Vtmvtql (/7: [0.79 0-7 639 BINDING av "DAB 8: SONS' BOOK BINDERY INC. LIBRARY BINDERS ”alum". meal“! "' A a I ABSTRACT IMPACT OF SELECTED AGRICULTURAL SCHEMES ON THE INNOVATION PATTERNS AMONG TRADITIONAL FARMERS IN THE SOUTHERN SAVANNA OF GHANA By Ross Edgar Bigelow Agricultural development in Ghana during the early 1960's did not keep pace with the demand for food products. President Kwame Nkrumah attempted to accelerate agricultural development by establishing state- run, large-scale agricultural development schemes. Some l23 Soviet- StYTe State Farms and forty Israeli, Nahal-type Workers' Brigade Farms Were primary among the schemes formed by 1965. Implicit in Nkrumah's agricultural revolution was the assumption Still common in the l970's that illiterate food farmers are toounpro- dllctive and too traditional in farming methods to provide the basis for 'Hltional agricultural development. Schemes were viewed as an alternative tC> increase production and demonstrate modern farming to local farmers. The purposes of this research have been (a) to measure the dif- 1=el'flantial impact of four schemes on small-acreage farmers, (b) to define the traditional farmer in terms of domestic and productivity factors, ((3) to determine what factors influence the most innovative and productive Far‘lners, and (d) to assess whether illiteracy inhibits innovation and Ross Edgar Bigelow production. Four hypotheses based on these purposes are tested in each case study and are collectively analyzed. This study is based on extensive field interviews of a sample of 192 food farmers in the Southern Savanna of Ghana located on and around four different types of agricultural development schemes: (a) the Afife- Weta State Farm, (b) the Somanya Norkers' Brigade Farm, (c) the Nungua Agricultural Research Station of the University of Ghana, and (d) the Ada Cooperative Food Farmers Union. Correlation matrices and factor analyses were generated based on 82 variables. Of these ten variables were selected for multiple-regression analysis. Tentative conclusions derived from the survey are: I. There is no inverse relationship between scheme impact and distance between farmer and scheme, i.e. the schemes had limited neigh- borhood effect. Schemes with the most active extension programs had the greatest impact, viz. the Research Station and the Cooperative. Schemes had unexploited potentialities to act as vehicles of extension. 2. Factor analysis revealed the comnunality of the following faCtors: advanced farmer age, large households, long farming experience arid residential occupance in a single locale, and strong advantages of 1and tenure. These elements define the traditional farmer. 50 defined, he also had high scores for productivity (acres farmed) and innovativeness ( i nnovations adopted). 3. Reasonably strong positive correlations were found between in"ovation and productivity, in terms of acres planted (r = .377), and SUSceptibility to scheme influences (r = .444). He also tended to have mol‘e travel experience, greater access to radio conmunication and a Ross Edgar Bigelow lfigher rate of extension service contact. In regression analysis, acreage, scheme impact. travel and radio factors explain only 33 per cent of vmdance. There appears to be a functional rather than causal relation- shnibetween innovation and production. They covary. 4. From case to case farmer domestic characteristics, crops and perceived problems varied little, but adoption rates and per farmer mneages showed significant variations. Innovation and acreage were lowest around the Workers' Brigade and State Farm and highest in the Research Station and Cooperative study areas. Major perceived problems were rainfall irregularity/water supply and lack of credit. 5. Labor bottlenecks were overcome by surprisingly high farmer rates of utilization of the tractor for land preparation (67 per cent) and hired labor fdr weeding (83 per cent). 6. Formal education does not appear to be a necessary condition for agricultural innovation and production. Since a majority of the farming population are mature and illiterate, agricultural development IDrOgrams should not skew emphasis to the younger, educated farmers. 7. The major difficulty facing agricultural development in Ghana does not appear to be getting farmers to produce and innovate, but Prtaviding the proper inputs, credit and infrastructural support. Further research is needed on these elements. Research should be integrated into Cleczision-making and government should play an active part in this. IMPACT OF SELECTED AGRICULTURAL SCHEMES ON THE INNOVATION PATTERNS AMONG TRADITIONAL FARMERS IN THE SOUTHERN SAVANNA OF GHANA By Ross Edgar Bigelow A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Geography 1973 Copyright by Ross Edgar Bigelow 1972 ii . TO MY WIFE ELAINE iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express my sincere appreciation to my Major Adviser, Professor John M. Hunter who chaired my Thesis Committee and has con- tributed significantly to my development as a geographer and social scientist. Professor Hunter's personal example and professional advice have guided my graduate program since his arrival at Michigan State University in l967. An expression of gratitude is extended also to Professor Harm J. deBlig, at present Chairman of the Department of Geography at the Uni- versity of Miami, Florida, who stimulated my professional growth and .served on my Guidance Committee until his departure from Michigan State University in 1968. Appreciation is also conveyed to Dr. Stanley Brunn and Dr. Ronald Horvath of the Department of Geography, Professor Lawrence Sommers, Chairman Of the Department of Geography, and Professor Milton Steinmueller of the Department of Natural Resources at Michigan State University, who served on my Guidance and Thesis Conmittees. Their encouragement and counsel, plus that of numerous staff and colleagues of the Department crf Geography and African Studies Center were valuable throughout my graduate program. I acknowledge with appreciation the support of the National Defense FOI'TN'Sln Language Fellowship program which allowed me to pursue my doctorate iv and study Hausa over a two-year period from 1966 to l968. I also am appreciative of the support of the Ford Foundation-sponsored Midwest Universities Consortium for International Activities, Inc. (MUCIA) which permitted my nine months of field work in Ghana during 1968 and l969. Special thanks are also extended to the Government of Ghana and the University of Ghana's Department of Geography which acted as my hosts throughout the field work. Government and academic personnel were ex- ceedingly helpful in giving direction to the research. Also, I am deeply grateful to the farmers of the Southern Savanna who responded to my questioning and were so genuinely hospitable. I am equally indebted to State Farm, Brigade and other government officials for their permission and cooperation during the research. The efforts of my field assistants in breaking the language barriers and in their commitment to the study were significant and very much appreciated. During thesis-writing the staff of the Ford Foundation in Lagos, Nigeria, with whom I continue to work for the development of West Africa, especially Mr. Melvin J. Fox, were most supportive of my efforts, for which I am deeply appreciative. Finally, I pay tribute to my loving wife, Elaine, without whom this work would have been impossible. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES .......................... LIST OF FIGURES ......................... CHAPTER AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH IN GHANA ...... Review of the Literature ................ Agricultural Development Schemes ............ The Ghanaian Experience ................ The "Traditional Farmer" ................ The Ghanaian Experience ................ Definition of the "Traditional Farmer" ........ The Innovative Productive Farmer ............ Education and the Farmer ................ Selection of the Case Studies .............. Selection of the Farmer Interviewees ........... The Physical Environment ................. Landscape, Geology and Soils ............. Climate and Hater Supply ............... Vegetation ...................... The People ....................... Historical Background .................. Population Characteristics .............. THE FIRST CASE STUDY: THE AFIFE-NETA STATE FARM AND LOCAL FARMERS ..................... Background and Development of the Scheme ........ Background ...................... Development of the Afife-Heta State Farm ....... Impact on Local Farmers ................. Local Food Farmer Characteristics, Production and Innovation ..................... Characteristics .................... vi Page ix Table of Contents (cont.) CHAPTER Production and Problems ............... Innovation ..................... Summary ........................ IV. THE SECOND CASE STUDY: THE WORKERS' BRIGADE AND LOCAL FARMERS ......................... Background and Development of the Scheme ....... Background ..................... Development of Somanya Horkers' Brigade Farm Local Food Farmer Characteristics, Production and Innovation ...................... Characteristics ................... Production and Problems ............... Innovation ..................... Summary ........................ V. THE THIRD CASE STUDY: THE NUNGUA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION AND LOCAL FARMERS ................ Background and Development of the Scheme ....... Background ..................... Development of the Agricultural Research Station . Impact on Local Farmers ................ Local Food Farmer Characteristics, Production and Innovation ...................... Characteristics ................... Production and Problems ............... Innovation ..................... Summary ..... . .................. VI. THE FOURTH CASE STUDY: LOCAL FOOD FARMERS AND THE ADA COOPERATIVE ....................... Background and Development of the Scheme ....... Background ...... p ............... Development of the Ada Cooperative ......... Impact on the Farmers ................. Local Food Farmer Characteristics, Production and Innovation ...................... Characteristics ................... Production and Problems ............... Innovation ..................... Summary ........................ vii Page 75 78 84 89 90 91 93 103 104 108 112 116 122 122 124 126 130 136 136 139 143 147 152 152 154 157 162 167 169 171 175 177 Table of Contents (cont.) Page CHAPTER VII. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS .................. 185 Hypothesis Examination ................ 185 Scheme Impact ................... 187 The Traditional Farmer ............... 191 The Innovative Farmer ............... 192 Formal Education .................. 193 Spatial Variations .................. 196 Differential Scheme Impact . ............ 195 Farmer Characteristics and Innovation ....... 200 VIII. CONCLUSIONS ...................... 206 Conclusions ..................... 207 Scheme Impact ................... 208 The Traditional Farmer ............... 203 The Innovative Farmer ............... 208 Formal Education .................. 210 Policy Implications ................. 210 BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................... 213 APPENDICES .......................... 230 Appendix A - Questionnaire fbr Farmers . . . . . . . . . . . 230 Appendix B - Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236 viii TABLE 10 11 12 13 14 LIST OF TABLES Page The Pre-Conditions of Innovation ............ 16 Summary of the Characteristics of the Four Case Study Foci in the Southern Savanna, Ghana ......... 32 Precipitation Data for the Case Study Areas ...... 28 Ethnic Distribution Among Peoples of Southeastern Ghana, 1960, and Study Area Sample, l969 ....... 44 Characteristics of the Rural Population of the Southern Savanna ....................... SO Crop Production on the Afife-Heta State Farm, 1967-1969-- Major and Minor Season Totals ............ 65 Perceived Major Sources of Influence in Adopting New Agricultural Practices by Fifty Farmers in the State Farm Study Area, 1969 ................ 67 Impact Index: Afife-Heta State Farm, 1969 ....... 70 Factor Loadings Defining Traditional Farmer,First Case Study ...................... 72 Population Characteristics of the Villages of the State Farm Study Area ................ 73 Savanna Crops and Acreages for Fifty Farmers in the State Farm Study Area, 1969 ............. 76 Major Sources of Capital Among Fifty Farmers in the State Farm Study Area, 1969 ............. 79 Inventory of Perceived Problems of Food Farmers and State Farm Employees in the Study Area, 1969 ..... 80 Travel Experience and Adoption of Innovations Among Study Area Food Farmers, l969 . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 ix List of Tables (cont.) TABLE 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Radio Accessibility and Adoption of Innovations Among Study Area Food Farmers, l969 .......... Extension Services Contact and Adoption of Innova- tions Among Study Area Food Farmers, l969 ....... Formal Education and Adoption of Innovations Among Study Area Food Farmers, 1969 ............. Crops, Acreages, and Yields on the Somanya Horkers' Brigade Farm, 1968-1969 ................ Perceived Sources of Influence in Adopting New Agricultural Practices by Fifty Farmers in the Study Area, 1969 ................... Selected Farm Plan Data of Two Demonstration Farms in the Horkers' Brigade Study Area, 1969 ....... Impact Index: Somanya Horkers' Brigade Farm, 1969 Factor Loadings Defining Traditional Farmer.Second Case Study . ...... . .............. Population Characteristics of the Villages of the Horkers' Brigade Study Area .............. Population Characteristics of the Sample by Ethnicity, in the Horkers' Brigade Study Area, 1969 . . . . . . . Savanna Crops and Acreages for Fifty Farmers in the Workers' Brigade Study Area, 1969 ........... Major Sources of Capital for Fifty Farmers in the Workers' Brigade Study Area, 1969 ........... Inventory of Perceived Problems of Peasant Farmers, Cooperative Members and Horkers' Brigade Employees in the Study Area, l969 ................ Travel Experience and Adoption of Innovations Among Study Area Food Farmers, l969 ............. Radio Accessibility and Adaption of Innovations Among Study Area Food Farmers, l969 . ............ Page 81 82 83 96 98 100 102 104 106 107 109 112 113 114 114 List of Tables (cont.) TABLE 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 Extension Services Contact and Adoption of Innova- tions Among Study Area Food Farmers, 1969 ...... Formal Education and Adoption of Innovations Among Study Area Food Farmers, l969 ......... Acreage Cropped in 1968 and Soil Type by Sections -- Agricultural Research Station (Nungua) . . ..... Perceived Major Sources of Influence in Adopting New Agricultural Practices by Food Farmers in the Station Study Area, 1969 .............. Countries Exporting Agricultural Machinery into Ghana, 1961-1967 . . ................ Impact Index: Agricultural Research Station, Nungua, 1969 .................... Factor Loadings Defining Traditional Farmer,Third Case Study ..................... Population Characteristics of the Villages of the Station Study Area ................. Crops and Acreages of Forty-two Food Farmers in the Station Study Area, 1969 . . . . .......... Major Sources of Capital for Agriculturalists in the Station Study Area, 1969 .............. Inventory of Perceived Problems of Farmers, with and without Cattle, in the Station Study Area, 1969 . . . . Travel Experience and Adoption of Innovations Among Station Study Area Food Farmers, 1969 ........ Radio Accessibility and Adoption of Innovations Among Station Study Area Food Farmers, 1969 ........ Extension Service Contact and Adoption of Innovations Among Station Study Area Food Farmers, 1969 ..... Formal Education and Adoption of Innovations Among Station Study Area Food Farmers, l969 ........ xi Page 115 116 128 131 134 135 137 138 141 144 .144 145 145 146 146 List of Tables (cont.) TABLE 45 46 47 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 Acreage Targets for the Ada Cooperative Food Farmers Union, Ltd., by Society and Crop, l969 ........ Perceived Major Sources of Influence in Adopting New Agricultural Practices by Fifty Farmers in the Ada Cooperative Study Area, 1969 ........... Impact Index: Ada Cooperative Food Farmers Union, l969. . Factor Loadings Defining Traditional Farmer;Fourth Case Study ...................... Population Characteristics of the Villages of the Ada Cooperative Study Area . . - ---------- Food Crap Production and Acreages of Private Holdings, for Fifty Farmers in the Ada Cooperative Study Area, 1969 ...................... Major Sources of Capital Among Fifty Farmers in the Ada Cooperative Study Area, l969 ........... Inventory of Perceived Problems of Fifty Food Farmers in the Ada Cooperative Study Area, 1969 ....... Travel Experience and Adoption of Innovation Among Study Area Food Farmers, l969 ............ Radio Accessibility and Adoption of Innovations Among Study Area Food Farmers, 1969 ............ Extension Services Contact and Adoption of Innovations Among Study Area Food Farmers, l969 ......... Formal Education and Adoption of Innovations Among Study Area Food Farmers, l969 ............ Hypothesis Support by Case Study ............ Tabular Hypothesis Analysis All Cases (N = 192) Simple Correlation Matrix for Ten Key Variables . . . . Travel Index ...................... Radio Index ...................... Page 161 163 166 168 170 172 176 176 178 178 179 186 187 188 190 194 194 List of Tables (cont.) Page TABLE 62 Extension Service Contact and Innovation ........ 195 63 Education Index .................... 195 64 Comparative Impact Index ................ 193 65 Perceived Major Sources of Influence on Innovations . . 199 66 Acreage and Intercropping ............... 20] 67 Innovation Adoption Rates ............... 204 xiii LIST OF FIGURES Page FIGURE 1 Location Map Ghana .................... 4 2 Population Distribution in the Southern Savanna of Ghana -- 1960 .................... 29 3 Agricultural Features of the Southern Savanna of Ghana -- l969 .................... 31 4 Monthly Rainfall and Hater Balance Data for Southern Savanna Stations, Ghana ................ 37 The Ewe Swamplands and the State Farm Study Area ..... 58 Afife-Heta State Farm .................. 62 Study Area Around the Somanya Norkers' Brigade Farm . . . 90 mVOSUT Soils and Land Use on the Somanya Norkers' Brigade Farm .......................... 94 9 Agricultural Development in the University Farm Area . . . 123 10 Plan of the University Agricultural Research Station . . . 127 11 The Ada C00perative Study Area .............. 152 xiv EQUIVALENTS Value of one Ghanaian New Cedi (NE) in 1969: NZ1.00 = $0.98 N£1.02 = $1.00 There were 100 New Pence (NP) in one New Cedi (NZ) XV CHAPTER I AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH IN GHANA Ghana attempted a number of interesting agricultural experiments during the early 1960's to overcome sluggish agricultural development. Under President Kwame Nkrumah this little West African country esta- blished large-scale development scheme in an attempt to solve this problem which is recognized as critical in many developing nations today. The traditional farmer was substantially ignored in this program though he continued to produce nearly all Ghana's food. Agriculture is the backbone of the Ghanaian economy. It has been the world's leading cocoa producing country since 1911, with production almost entirely in the hands of peasant farmers. Over sixty per cent of the labor force is in the agricultural sector which accounts for just under fifty per cent of the gross domestic product and over seventy per cent of the country's experts.1 However, during the 1960's agricultural production did not match population growth.2 With a population of 8.5 million in 1970 spread over 92,000 square miles Ghana's population grew at a rate of about three per cent per year, a doubling over the period of a generation.3 Food production in the agricultural sector was nearly stagnant. Development of agriculture was sought through large-scale schemes Ifith aid from Soviet, Israeli and other foreign sources. Some 123 1 Soviet-style State Farms and forth Israeli-inspired workers' Brigade Farms were primary among schemes formed by 1965. Less attention was paid to the traditional, small-acreage farmer despite his success in producing a profitable external cash crop such as cocoa.4 Ghanaian planners and agriculturalists often contended that the illiterate farmer was too preoccupied with subsistence to provide adequate internal food supplies or form the basis of agricultural development. Though by no means sub- stantiated, this view is still commonly held by African planners.5 This research has four basic purposes. First, it is to measure the differential impact on Ghanaian, small-acreage farmers, of four agricultural schemes. Related to this an attempt is made to determine whether scheme impact is more closely related to farmer perception of and participation in scheme activities, or to a spatial variable, viz. the distance between farmer and scheme. Index techniques and correlation analysis are used. Second, the study aims to define the so—called "traditional farmer" in terms of domestic and productivity characteristics. Can the tradi- tional farmer be distinguished by age, household size, years of farming experience and residential occupance in a local, family composition, and land tenure? Are "traditional farmers" unproductive and uninnovative? Factor analysis is employed to determine the major variables accounting for the variation. Third, the research tries to determine what factors influence the most innovative and productive farmers. What is the effect of travel experience, access to radio communication and extension service contact? Is the most innovative farmer the most productive? Is he the most in- fluenced by scheme impact? How are production and innovation related? 0" Correlation and regression analyses are utilized to answer these ques- tions. Fourth, the study attempts to establish whether illiteracy, measured in terms of years of formal education, inhibits innovation and production. Is formal education a necessary condition for agricultural innovation and production? Correlation analysis is used to test this. This study is based on extensive field interviews of a sample of 192 food farmers. In the Southern Savanna region of Ghana (Figure 1) located on and around four different types of agricultural development schemes: a State Farm, a Horkers' Brigade Farm, a University Agricultural Research Station, and an indigenous cooperative. Four hypotheses are tested individually and collectively, based on data collected in the four case study areas. A review of agricultural development and research in Ghana and a description of the study area are found in the first two chapters. These are followed by chapter case studies of each of the four schemes testing each hypothesis. A comparative analysis of the hypotheses and of spatial variations from scheme area to scheme area is then presented, followed by a concluding chapter. Review of the Literature Over the past quarter century there has been a massive increase 'hithe research and literature on the subject of economic development in Africa. Many roads to development have been explored by social scien- tists. Students of economics, anthropology, rural sociology, political science and administration, rural development and geography have engaged - __ _ _ - _.17 - — .~. ‘_ f' -'.-'-\l "~'a y" r ‘ '1' .1} I. 2"" ’ 7' ‘ ‘ F" \f Baum}? 91° N 1 ,‘ BOLGATANGA ,- ~’ °‘ “ i ' r‘ L 0 CA T | O N LIJ I‘— ‘ ITS a, .1 9 k \x . a a. P 0' O _ 0 V, MA 3 > 1 S _,' Lu». W“ N 0 R T E” ’V *4 GHANA . '\./‘1—\ I- . \ 1 '0‘ ' .l .I co\41 < 1 . ,9. i (‘3‘ s A 14.4 N N 14 .: > 1 .TAMALE . ‘21" l, O "' Y°"°' 5 GHANA /’ 3" (' o . O ; I -9° Damonoo . + .3 ( o‘ .\ >’ ‘5 a: I) ‘. l O l I). c“ 1 . > .r' IUJ ’3 (1 ,‘8°-4 — '/l L A i 2-. ,/ v o L ,‘ o ‘- I I l < I i O . ("7°- ( I x I /fl’/ \- /Ako bo‘ / Daryl-Ia KETA 'v' I-" PLAINS m-}80UTHERMLj no 0 IO 20 so 40 so scALé »: MILeo s°-4 0° ° 1 , AdgEied from Survoj of Ghana rub FIGURE 1 in an effort to detail the elements of development and formulate theories of advancement. Much of the relevant literature and current research on West Africa are reviewed in bibliographical works by Carl K. Eicher,6 James Gordon,7 and Norman N. Miller.8 Eicher's work is the most recent of these and has useful introductory chapters on research environments and priori- ties. It focuses on the five anglophone West African countries with special emphasis on Nigeria where he did much of his own field work in agricultural economics. Gordon lists a wide range of social research particularly on Ghana and Nigeria. Miller's edition nominally covers all of rural Africa and includes signed articles by major North American researchers from a broad spectrum of social sciences. The three publica- tions include most of the standard works applicable to rural agricultural development in Ghana. A Selected Bibliography of items related to the current research is presented at the end of the thesis. Also recorded are a number of other reports, official documents and unpublished ma- terials. Despite the wide variety of published materials there is no generally accepted theory of economic development.9 This is not sur- prising given the complexity of the task and the varied perspectives of researchers. However, considerable headway has been made toward zeroing in on the key elements in development and in discarding myths. Eicher suggests that the following hypotheses are among those which have been rejected during the 1960's: the noneconomic behavior of African farmers, industrialization as the sole means of increasing productivity, the intractability of rural value systems vis-a-vis innovation, land tenure and family planning, and the large-scale production of plantation crops as the basis for all agricultural development in West Africa.10 During the 1960's these “myths" were challenged by the work of social scientists including eSpecially significant studies by agricultural economists."n Evidence was uncovered which demonstrated that the behavior of West African farmers could be understood within the framework of general economic principles.12 Studies also revealed that the producti- vity of peasant farmers could be stimulated under given economic condi- tions,13 and that employment generation and "labor bottlenecks" during key periods in the growing season were the primary obstacles to in- creased production in African agriculture.l4 Institutional and infra- structural factors, such as agricultural extension and training, credit, marketing and cooperatives, were also discovered to be important develop- ment factors and became the foci of serious attention by researchers.15 Other authors raised the vitally important issues of socioeconomic growth, population, and the influence of cultural attitudes and value systems.16 A diverse array of agricultural and settlement schemes were analyzed and classified.17 Increased technical assistance in the Third World has resulted in a deluge of published an unpublished documents by bilateral and multilateral aid agencies and foundations.18 These and other works19 have brought us closer to an understanding of what development means in the contemporary African context. However, one must define "development" before attempting to consider means of achieving it. Herein development is defined as raising the socioeconomic levels of pe0p1e over time and space. More stress is placed upon how development contributes to the socioeconomic advance of human beings than measurement of growth in gross national product or increases in per capita income. In the view of this writer all useful studies of development must of necessity relate in one way or another to the economic realm, and one must define development in economic terms. Furthermore, if a general theory of development is someday evolved, it would certainly be dependent on economic factors. Aside from theory-building, there are other more immediate and practical means of dealing with the problems of general and rural, agri- cultural development in Africa. Johnson asserts, "The alternative to creating general theories of development is interdisciplinary attacks on the particular problems one finds in the real world."20 The problem- solving approach allows the development context to structure the research and integrate the efforts and talents of different social scientists. Eicher, in discussing the priority problem of research on food crops in West Africa, stresses, ". . . agricultural economists need to be joined by geographers, sociologists, communication experts, etc., in problem- solving research on food production."2]. This accords with the view of this researcher. Agricultural Development Schemes As noted earlier one of the purposes of this research is to mea- sure the impact on small holders of different agricultural development schemes. Schemes form the foci of four case study areas. Discussions of study areas, the selection of cases and the sampling of farmers are presented in Chapter II. In this section we will review the Ghanaian experience with schemes, suggest an hypothesis for analysis, and consider a means for measuring impact. The Ghanaian Experience . eegwa Ever since the Geriza-Scheme was successfully implemented by the British in the Sudan in the 1920's, African countries have been using it as a prototype for other agricultural experiments.22 In Ghana the Gggigéwmodel was used in 1950 by the Agricultural Development Corpora- tion's Gonja Development Company to establish the Gonja project near Damongo in the northern savanna (Figure l). The objective was to raise groundnuts and other crops and to resettle peasant farmers on large- scale, mechanized farms in unoccupied savanna. Largely because of poor feasibility studies at the outset, the project encountered numerous organizational, climatic, and edaphic difficulties and was liquidated in 1957, as was the Agricultural Development Corporation in 1962.23 The failure was in part attributed to the backwardness of the farmers who were settled. The Gonja failure was proof for some planners that the peasant farmer was able to contribute little to the general economic development of the country. During the Presidency of Dr. Kwame Nkrumah (1957-66) Ghana attempted to expand commercial agriculture with large-scale, mechanized, state-run schemes to improve foreign exchange conditions, increase domestic consumption and encourage import-substituting industries based on Ghanaian farm products. In the early 1960's Nkrumah's iconoclastic experimentation aroused much enthusiasm and his ideas seem to have contained at least some seeds for success. After Nkrumah's visit to the Soviet Union in 1960 his government sought.to revamp the entire organization of agriculture. The Ministry of Agriculture was abolished and replaced by the State Farms Corporation in 1962. Some 123 large-scale, mechanized State Farms were formed by 1965 to produce everything from cocoa and rubber to yams, casava, fruit and vegetables. However, despite huge capital expenditures, the com- bined output of the State Farms did not exceed one per cent of the country's agricultural production. Other experiments in large-scale agriculture that were tried included: forty Horkers' Brigade farms patterned on Israeli systems, fifty-two resettlement farms developed around Lake Volta, three Agri- cultural Research Stations of the University of Ghana, and many coopera- tives developed by the United Ghana Farmers Council Cooperatives primarily in the cocoa belt. Efforts to effect change in agricultural productivity were directed at revolutionary “great leaps forward" rather than evolu- tionary first steps or adaptations of existing systems of food production. During the latter half of the Nkrumah regime, 1961-1966, approxi- mately 7 - 10 per cent of the total annual government budget was allocated to agriculture of which 62 per cent on the average went in support of the State Farms Corporation and Cocoa Division.24 In 1965, the investment in State Farms reached a peak of nearly N¢11,000,000 and for the first and only time in the 1960's exceeded that for cocoa production (about N¢5,500,000). This was in spite of the fact that very few State Farms had never shown a penny of profit while cocoa continued to provide over three-fifths of the country's export income. Such economic nonsense 10 resulted in internal financial difficulties and external debts which Ghana is still facing in the 1970's. With the fall of the Nkrumah government in 1966, the National Liberation Council military government immediately began a program of curtailment of State Farm Corporation activities. By 1969 the number of State Farms was pared to 40 and each was put on a "self-accounting" basis whereby the farm was to generate its own profits or be closed down. Total investment in agriculture declined to about five to six per cent of the total annual budgets in 1967-68 through 1969-70.25 Un- fortunately, the de-emphasis on State Farms was not counter-balanced by greater investments in other agricultural programs. During the brief return to civilian government from October, 1969 to January, 1972, the Progress Party of Prime Minister Busia made agriculture and rural develOpment first priorities.26 Total investment in agriculture was expected to grow during the 1970's because of increased commitment to it among Ghanaian decision makers. The Ghanaian experience with the Russian-style State Farms and the Israeli-type Horkers' Brigade and their impacts on surrounding farmers are studied in Chapters III and IV, respectively. Specific case studies focus on the Afife-Heta State Farm and the Somanya Horkers' Brigade found in the Southern Savanna. These are contrasted with the impacts of two other types of schemes found in the same region: the Agricultural Research Station of the University of Ghana, at Nungua, and the Ada Food Farmers Cooperative Union, in Ada. These cases are reviewed in Chapters V and VI, respectively. 11 Hypothesis and Measurement of Scheme Impact A number of interesting questions are raised by the contrast between large-scale, capital-intensive, mechanized agricultural develop- ment schemes and surrounding small-scale, minimally-capitalized peasant farmers. 00 these small and large-scale agricultural systems Operate independently? Do the schemes have impact on local farming practices or the adoption of innovation? Are scheme influences the most signi- ficant factors in changing local farming methods? At the micro-level is spatial distance between farmer and scheme a factor? How can scheme impact be measured? Calculation of the influence of a large-scale scheme on local farmers might be accomplished in at least the following two ways: (1) by studying changes in agricultural practices of surrounding farmers over a period of time and determining the sources of impact in retrospect, or (2) by determining at one point in time the sources of impact as perceived by surrounding farmers. The second of these approaches was employed in this research, though much of the literature on diffusion deals with the dynamics of information flow over time.27 Divorcing the examination of the hypothesis from the time element means that this is primarily a perceptional rather than a diffusional study.28 The first hypothesis to be tested is: Scheme impact on small-acreage farmers is not inversely related to micro-spatial distance between farmer and scheme. To measure scheme impact an impact Index has been developed. It is based on sample farmer responses to an arbitrarily selected set of questions concerning: (a) contact experience with the scheme through food purchases, 12 visits, or direct participation in scheme work, demonstration farming, training or extension programs, and (b) farmer perception of scheme benefit and scheme impact on his agricultural innovation patterns. The Impact Index is expressed by the following equation: NT Impact Index = X 100 where: FEr = number of sample farmers' positive responses to given questions concerning farmer experience with scheme FPr = number of sample farmers' positive responses to given questions concerning farmer percep- tion of scheme N0 = number of farmers sampled times the number of questions asked Though the Impact Index could be employed as a tool in a variety of situations by substituting and/or weighting questions, this is beyond the concern of the present research. Here the Index represents a mean percentage of positive scheme impact based on certain farmer responses about contact experience and perception of schemes. Specific data and indices are presented in each case study. To provide a clearer picture of how the Index works, however, the following example is given. Supposing 4O farmers (N) were asked eight questions (0) concerning their impact experience and perception. Let us assume that of the 320 possible responses (NO) by the sample, 120 positive responses were given concerning scheme impact on farmer experience (FEr) and 40 positive responses were given concerning farmer perception of scheme impact (FPr). The Impact Index would be 160/320 X 100 or 50 per cent. 13 This would mean that of the farmers sampled on the average 50 per cent were positively influenced by the scheme. The Impact Index has been employed as a factor in a factor analysis of the data and as both an independent and dependent variable in a series of multiple-regression analysis. These analyses were undertaken at both the case study and regional (Southern Savanna) levels. The "Traditional Farmer" Traditional, small-scale farmers are generally recognized as the principal operatives in the agricultural growth of developing countries because of their numbers and their potential. Paradoxically, the "tra- ditional farmer" frequently has the unflattering image of a conservative, subsistence-orientated and unproductive individual who is uneducated and hews closely to the farming techniques of his forefathers. Deriving from this image it is often assumed that he is necessarily uninnovative or even uneconomic in his behavior. However, in point of fact the characteristics of the so called "traditional farmer" are seldom assessed or defined, nor is the image adequately challenged. A second purpose Of this research is to define the term "traditional farmer" to give us a clearer picture of how he related to the development process in rural areas . The Ghanaian Experience During the colonial period, Gold Coast administrators often took a short-sighted view of the change process. Local farming practices were often looked on in absolute rather than relative terms. It was easy to assume that "traditional agriculture" meant unchanged or even unchangable 14 agriculture. In British Nest Africa plantations and large-scale agricul- ture were limited and there was a laissez faire stance with respect to the so-called "traditional farming" activities.29 Restraint was exer- cised in altering existing customary practices, particularly when it came to land tenure.30 Such benign colonialism probably had the effect of entrenching existing practices while at the same time reinforcing the notion that the indigenous farmer was resistant to change. Following independence in 1957 low rural farmer incomes and in- adequate investment in small-scale agriculture by Ghana did not allow the perception to be altered. Per capita agricultural income was only N¢l35-140 per year.31 Since about three-fifths of the economically- active population were engaged in farming, this meant that the principal segment of the population had limited purchasing power and remained largely outside the commercial market for industrial and agricultural goods and services. Over the period 1961-62 to 1969-70 the total annual budget of the Ministry of Agriculture averaged about N¢25,000,000. In the latter year investment represented less than 40 per cent of the recommended minimum budget for a country with the Gross National Product of Ghana's.32 Of this miniscule amount no more than half benefitted the small-scale food producer. Only N¢7 per capita farm population was spent by the government for higher-yielding seed, fertilizer, and technology to directly increase small-holder productivity. The balance was consumed in administration, support for cocoa and other export crops, and in certain regulatory functions such as produce inspection. 15 The inadequacy of past investment in rural agricultural environ- ments is now recognized as a key limitation to overall economic progress.33 A first step toward increasing rural incomes is through greater invest- ment in the productivity of the local farmer. Definition of the "Traditional Farmer“ Any generalizations made about the capacity for change among local farmers must recognize that innovation and development are structured by the satisfaction of a hierarchy of factors. Pre-conditions which must be met before any farmer is in a position to break new earth, so to speak, include: environmental, institutional, manpower and socio-cultural factors. Table 1 demonstrates the relationships among these. Those at the lower end are most basic and least alterable. Higher pre-conditions can only be met by satisfaction of the lower ones first. Innovation is, therefore, possible when all the pre-conditions have been met. An agricultural environment must possess the potential in agronomic and technical terms for development. Inadequate edaphic and climatic conditions can prelude the evolution of viable agriculture. These factors are least easily altered. It is uncertain even with major long-term in- vestment, in, for example, irrigation/reclamation and agronomic research, whether change can be wrought. Institutional limitations such as in- adequate budgets and infrastructure and inexperienced administration can be countered through increased budgets and investment in, for example, training, ministerial coordination and more rural credit.34 Institu- tional problems are basically capital and planning problems. Manpower factors are also pre-conditions of innovation. The upgrading of skills, 16 TABLE l.--The Pre-Conditions of Innovation Alter- Hierarchy of Pre- Examples of Methods of ability Conditions Change Most easily Socio-Cultural, at- Innovation, personal contacts altered titudes, perception and exposure to new ideas ManpOwer: skills, abi- Skills training, adult educa- lities, experience tion, extension Institutional: econom- Increase budget and investment ic health of country, in training leadership, promote administrative compe- coordination, increase rural tence, marketing/roads] credit, etc. infrastructural elements Least easily Environmental: climate, Uncertain; possibly major, long- altered soils, drainage, ecology term capital investment, e.g.; irrigation/reclamation, agronomic research over time A abilities and experiences through training, adult education, and ef- fective extension services may rectify this. Socio-cultural factors are the most easily altered of the pre- conditions in the hierarchy, if all lower pre-conditions have been satis- fied. Attitudes and perceptions are influenced by personal contacts and exposure to new ideas. Unfortunately, it is these attitudes and percep- tions which are so often maligned by the critics of the innovativeness of the so called "traditional farmer", quite probably because they are the last obstacles in the adoption process, rather than the most serious. To ask the farmer to innovate without the satisfaction of the pre-conditions 17 is to expect him unfairly to bear the burden and the risk for an in- adequate support system. The second hypothesis to be tested is: The "Traditional Farmer" can be defined in terms of domestic characteristics (age, residence, years of farming, land tenure, household/family size and formal education) but not in terms of low productivity or lack of innovativeness. The hypothesis will be tested at the case study and regional levels by use of factor analysis. This technique is frequently used for classi— fication and definition of data.35 The Innovative Productive Farmer The full innovative and productive capacities of Ghana's over 2,000,000 food farmers36 must be tapped to meet the country's agricul- tural demands. The past program of agricultural development, through large-scale schemes, and the provision of extension and other agricul- tural services, has failed to yield adequate foodstuffs. Statistics of the Ministry of Agriculture for the 1960's demonstrate wide fluctua- tions in the production of food crops such as cassava, maize, groundnuts, cowpeas, and other legumes.37 Over the period 1966-1968 there were absolute decreased in the outputs of individual crops. This pattern has been repeated elsewhere in Africa as well. The Food and Agriculture Organization reported that in 1969 there was an absolute decrease in agricultural output for Africa, despite the rising population estimated at 2.5 per cent to 3.0 per cent per year.38 These failures may be attributed in part to an inadequate under- standing of the characteristics of the successful farmer. A further 18 purpose of this research has been to study the qualities of and factors influencing the most innovative and productive farmers. The third hypothesis to be tested is: Innovation among farmers is directly related to farmer produc- tivity, susceptability to scheme impact, and extension service contact, travel experience, and access to radios. To measure the innovativeness against farmer characteristics a series of indices have been develOped, including: (a) The Innovation Index: average number (ranging from O to 4) of innovations of a given farmer sample; (b) The Travel Index: arbitrarily assigned values (ranging from 1 to 7) corresponding to the travel experience of a given farmer sample; and (c) The Radio Index: arbitrarily assigned values (ranging from 1 to 9) correSponding to the accessability of radio contact of a given farmer sample. These indices have been employed as factors in factor analysis of the data and as both independent and dependent variables in a series of multiple-regression analyses. Coefficient of correlation matrices have also been generated using the data, including relationships with farmer productivity (measured in terms of planted acreage) and extension service contact/non-contact. Education and the Farmer Surprisingly little is known about the role of education in agricultural development. Few studies of the subject are based on field research designed to pinpoint elements or systems of education which have a maximum economic advantage for agricultural development.39 Our limited evidence suggests that an agricultural revolution in Africa will ggt_be channeled through_the fOrmal educational system, 19 though this notion is the basis for a number of educational experiments in Tanzania,40 Ghana41 and elsewhere on the continent. One might assert that if there is to be change it is likely to evolutionary and be generated from an amelioration of environmental, agronomic and infrastructural limi- tations which facilitate innovation by the individual farmer. Nhen supported by non-formal and informal education programs including adult literacy, rural vocational training, and extension, agricultural develop- ment may be furthered. It would appear that the number of years of formal education pro- vides no index to innovativeness, productivity or the agricultural development potential of the local farmer.42 This is perhaps not so surprising. Firstly, formal education attempts to provide over the period of several years, the basic building blocks (reading, writing, arithmetic,etc.) and mental sets (creativity, problem-solving capability, intellectual freedom) for all forms of development, rather than imparta- tion of skills through short-term training. Secondly, the quantity of formal education does not tell us anything about the guality of the teaching, the applicability of the curricula or the capability of the learner. Thirdly, formal education is commonly disjunct from the agri- cultural environment; past efforts to make rural education more practical and agricultural in character have failed using the formal educational framework where it has been unsupported by the realities of agriculture. Fourthly, fOrmal education has been made available primarily to the younger generation not the older, agriculturally productive segment of the population, which has more land and capital and, generally, more com- mitment to the agricultural way of life. 20 Another purpose of this research has been to assess the role of education in agricultural development in the study area. This was a secondary objective but one designed to tap the data to uncover clues about the relationship between education and the farmer. Specifically, the fourth hypothesis to be tested is: Formal education among farmers is not related to agricultural production or innovation. To assess the role of formal education an Education Index has been developed. This was based on the number of years of formal schooling. As with the other indices, relationships with farmer productivity and extension service contact/non-contact were studied using correlation matrices. The Education Index has also been employed in factor and multiple-regression analyses. Summar . In this introductory chapter we have briefly looked at some of the problems faced in the development of agriculture in Ghana. The general literature has been surveyed to get a perspective on these prob- lems. A review has also been made of the Ghanaian experience with agri- cultural development schemes and the role of the so-called “traditional farmer" in providing solutions. The data generated by this research are to be analyzed in the following chapters through the testing of the following four hypotheses: (1) Scheme impact on small-acreage farmers is not inversely re- lated to the micro-spatial distance between farmer and scheme. (2) The “traditional farmer" can be defined in terms of domestic characteristics (age, residence, years of farming, land tenure, household/family size and formal education) but not in terms of low productivity or lack of innovativeness. 21 (3) Innovation among farmers is directly related to farmer pro- ductivity, susceptibility to scheme impact, and extension service contact, travel experience and access to radios. (4) Formal education among farmers is not related to agricultural production and innovation. Before moving to the case analyses, let us take a closer look at the study area, the selection of the cases and the sampling of the farmers. CHAPTER I--FO0TNOTES 1See Halter Birmingham, I. Neustadt, and E. N. Omaboe, A Study of Contemporary Ghana, I, The Economy of Ghana (London: George en and Unwin, 1966), p. 215. thana, Ministry of Agriculture, Division of Economics and Statistics, Crpp Area, Yield and Production 1965-1967 (Accra: 1969). 3Population Reference Bureau, 1971 Horld Population Data Sheet (Washington, D. C.: April, 1971). ' 4Polly Hill, The Migrant Cocoa Farmers Of Southern Ghana: A Study in Rural Capitalism (London: Cambridge university Press, 1963). 5See for example Dr. G. K. Asamoa and Dr. S. V. Adu, "Agricultural Scientists and Food Production in Ghana," Daily Graphic (Accra: May 5, 1970 . 6Carl K. Eicher, Research on Agricultural Development in Five English-Speaking Countries in West Africa (New York: Agricultural Development Council, 1970), 153p. 7James Gordon, "Rural Sociology and Economics in Relation to Agricultural Development in Hest Africa: An Annotated Bibliography," Ghana Journal of Agricultural Science, Vol. I (1968), pp. 173-8. 8Norman N. Miller, ed., Research in Rural Africa (East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1969): 341 p. 9The lack of a general theory of economic development is reviewed by Marvin P. Miracle, "Agricultural Economics in Africa: Trends in Theory and Method," pp. 141-51, and Glenn L. Johnson, "Agricultural Economics: A Critical Review," pp. 178-83, in Norman H. Miller, ibid. 10Eicher, op. cit.. pp. 11-7, Footnote 6. 1IImportant among these were: Bruce F. Johnston and John H. Mellor, "The Role of Agriculture in Economic Development," American Economic Review, LI (September, 1961), pp. 571-81; Carl K. Eicher and Lawrence Ritt, eds., Agriculture in Economic Development (New York: McGraw-Hill 1964); Herman M. SoUthworth and'Bruce’FTTJOHnston, eds., A ricultural Develo ment and Economic Growth (Ithaca, New York: CornelI University Press, 1967); John H. Mellor, The Economics of Agricultural Development 22 I‘vb F. " I“ 23 (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1966); and Max F. Millikan and David Hapgood, No Easy Harvest (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1967). 12The classic in this sphere is William Jones, Economic Man in Africa (Stanford: Food Research Institute Studies, May, 1960), pp. 107- 34. Also important are Arnold Rivkin, "Economic Incentives in African Life," Journal ofAfrican Administration, XII, No. 4 (October, 1960), pp. 224:7; Marvin P. Miracle:T“Subsistence Agriculture: Analytical Problems and Alternative Concepts," American Journal of A ricultural Economics (May, 1968), pp. 292-310; HiTT, Op. cit., Footno ei4. 13Stimulating the productivity of the peasant farmer has been the subject of several publications: Theodore H. Schultz, Transformin Traditional Agriculture (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1964); Ester BOserup, The Conditionspof Agpjcultural Growth: The Economics of Agrarian Change Under Population Pressure (Chicago: Aldine, 1965); Arthur T1 MOsher, Getting Agriculture MOving (New York: Praeger, 1966). 14See John C. deHilde, et. al., Experiences with Agricultural Development in Tropical Africa (2 VOls.; BaTtimore: JOhns HOpkins Press, 1967), I, pp. 71-94. More recently the problem and importance of employ- ment generation in agriculture have been raised in an articulate article by Carl K. Eicher, "lacking Africa's Employment Problems," Africa Report, XVI, No. 1 (January, 1971), pp. 30-3; and in Carl K. Eicher, et. al., Employment Generation in African A riculture, Institute of International Agriculture Researcthepo t NO. 9' East Lansing: Michigan State University, July, 1970 . lSdeuiide, ibid., pp. 157-219; and Kurt R. Anschel, Russel M. Brannon, and Eldon D. Smith, eds., A ricultural Cooperatives and Markets in DevelopingCountries (New York: raeger, 1969). 16Socio-cultural factors are treated in Walter Birmingham, I. Newstact, and E. N. Omaboe, A_§tudy of Contemporary Ghana, II, Some Aspects of Social Stgycture (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1966); Pierre GOurou, The Tropical Horld: Its Social and Economic Conditions and its Future Statgs, trans. by E. D. Laboroe (4th ed.; London: Longmans, Green and Co. Ltd., 1966); Rene Dumont, False Start in Africa, trans. by Phyilis Nautsott (New York: Praeger, 1966); Georg Borgstrom, The Hungry Planet (London: Collier-MacMillan Ltd., 1967); Everett M. Rogers, MOHernization AmongAPeasants: The Impact of Communication (New York: HOlt, Rinehart, Winston, 1969); BUy Hunter, Modernizing PEasant Societies: A Comparative Study of Asia and Africa (New York: Oxford University Press, 1969(. Specific examples of studies of socio-cultural attitudes and value systems are cited in the individual case studies in Chapters III-VI. 17For discussions of scheme in Ghana and other parts of Africa see John deHilde, Op. cit., I, p. 129, Footnote 14; Robert Chambers, .uuu—..ru—.. an. m ._.....n .1 u . e. 1.. .Uu—t. -,. ..r.,. U. s 1 fat 2.9.. \f- \J~o.I-V. an. I... 1.... EN 2 E 24 Settlement Schemes in Tropical Africa: A Study of Or anizations and Development (New York: Praeger,l969), especially Part IV; Albert 0. HirSChman, DevelOpment Projects Observed (Washington, D. C.: The Brookings Institute, 1967). 13Partners in Development: Report of the Commission on Interna- tional Development (The PearsonReport), Report for the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Lester Pearson, chairman (New York: Praeger, 1969). 19Also refer to the Selected Bibliography for additional works. 20Johnson, op. cit., p. 180, Footnote 9. 2IEicher, op. cit., p. 44, Footnote 6. 22See William A. Hance, "The Gezira Scheme: A Study in Agri- culatural Development,“ African Economic Development, ed. by William A. Hance (2nd edition; LondOn: Pall MaTl, 1967), pp. 31-53. 23See discussions of Gonja in Marvin P. Miracle and Ann Seidman, State Farms in Ghana (No. 3 Publication; Madison: Land Tenure Center, 1968), pp. 3l-53. (Mimeographed); T. E. Hilton, "Land Planning and Resettlement in Northern Ghana," Geo ra h , "Agricultural Migration and Land-Use in Central Ghana," Tidzschrift voor Economisch en Social Geografie, LII (September, 1961), pp. 225330. 24See Ghana, The Annual Estimates,_Agriculture 1961-62, 1962-63, l963-64,p1965, and 1966-67 (Accra: 1970-71). ‘The FOodTand Agriculture Organization recommends that 13-15 per cent of budgets be devoted to agriculture. See United Nations, Food and Agriculture Organization, and Economic Commission for Africa, Fourth Inter-Regional Seminar on Development Planning, Development Prospects and Planning for the Coming Décade (With SpeciglpReference to Africal, I.S.D.R. 4/A/R, l and 2, Meeting in Accra, Ghana, 4-13 December, 968 (Addis Ababa: F.A.O./ E.C. ., 1968 . 25Ghana, The Annual Estimates, Agriculture (Accra: 1957-68, 1969-70). 26See Pro ress Party Manifesto (Accra: August 2, 1969); and "Sessional Address of Brigadier A. A. Afrifa, State Opening of the First Session of the First Parliament of the Second Republic," (Accra: October 2, 1969). A second military coup in January, 1972 placed the National Redemption Council in power. 27See for example Everett M. Rogers' Diffusion of Innovations (New York: Glencoe, Free Press, 1962); and TOrsten Hagerstrand's "Quantitative Techniques for Analysis of the Spread of Information and Technology," Education and Economic Development, comp. by Arnold C. Anderson and Mary Jean Bowman (Chicago: Aldine, 1965), pp. 244-80; 25 and Torsten Hagerstrand's Innovation Diffusion as a Spatial Process (Chicago: University of Chicago Piess, 1967). A three:phase Innovation in Eastern Nigeria research project, financed by U.S.A.I.D., and directed by Everett M. Rogers of Michigan State University, was conducted in 1965- 67 and resulted in the following publications: Gerald D. Hursh, Neils G. Roling, and Graham 8. Kerr, Success and Failure of Agricultural Programs in 71 Villages of Eastern Nigeria (East Lansing: Michigan State University, September, 1968); Joseth. Ascroft, et. al., Patterns of Diffusion in Rural Eastern Nigeria (East Lansing: Michigan State—Univer- sity, February, 1969); andTGeraldTD. Hursh, et. al., Communication in Eastern Nigeria: An Experiment in Introducing Change (East Lansing: Michigan State University, July, 1968). The last experimental phase was disrupted by the Nigerian Civil War. 28Compare the two approaches in the Association of American Geographers' Spatial Diffusion, Commission on College Geography Resource Paper No. 4 (Washington: A.A.U., 1969) and Perception of Environment, ngmgssion on College Geography Resource Paper No. 5 (Washington: A.A.U., 9 . 29$ee W. M. Macmillan, Africa Emergent (2nd ed.; Harmondsworth, Middlexes: Penguin, 1949). 30C. F. Charter, "Estate Agriculture and the Integration of Peasant Farming," Miscellaneous Pa er No. l (Kumasi: Gold Coast Depart- ment of Soil and Land Survey, 1954 , p. 12. 3IGhana, Central Bureau of Statistics, Economic Survey, 1968 (Accra: 1969). It should be noted that despite GhanaTs’low per capita agricultural income, it stood higher in this regard than any other West African country. 32See Ghana, The Annual Estimates,Agriculture, 1969-70 and 1970-71, op. cit., Footnote 26. The 1969-70 the budgetary provision fOr agriculture was N¢26.6 million of a total budget of N¢468.6 million of 5.8 per cent--the fifth largest expenditure sector behind Education, Defense, Construction, and Finance-Development. The Food and Agriculture Organization and Economic Commission for Africa, op. cit., Footnote 24, recommends a 13 per cent - 15 per cent investment in agriculture. 33See Yuan H. Ojang, "Some Information on Farming by Small Holdings" (Accra: 15 November, 1968); (Mimeographed). (Ojang was a Food and Agriculture Organization expert attached to the Irrigation and Reclama- tion Division). Also see James Gordon, "Problems of 'Settled Farming' in the Humid Tropics" (Legon: Faculty of Agriculture, 1969). Mimeographed.) 26 34An excellent discussion of the problems of small-holder capital limitations in Ghana is contained in: Ghana, Report of the Committee on Agricultural Indebtedness (Accra: Ministry of Agriculture,il967). Though theReport was written ten years before publication, it was still an accurate assessment of the situation in the late 1960's. 35The classic article describing this and other uses of Factor Analysis is R. J. Rummel, "Understanding Factor Analysis," Journal of Conflict Resolution, XI, No. 4 (1967), pp. 444-80. 36Ghana, Manpower Board, First Annual Report (Accra: 1969). 37Ghana, Crop Area, Yield and Production (1965-67), pp. cit., Footnote 2. 38United Nations, Food and Agriculture Organization, The State of Food and Agriculture 1970 (Rome: F.A.O., 1970). 39Studies based on field research on the role of education in agricultural development in Africa include: E. R. Watts, ed., New Hope for Rural Africa, Proceedings of Conference held in Kikuyu, Kenya, September, 1967—(Nairobi: East African Publishing House, 1969); James R. Sheffield, ed., Education, Employment and Rural Develppment. Proceedings of Conference held in Kericho, Kenya, September,l966 (NaiFObi: East African Publishing House, 1967); John C. Caldwell, "The Demographic Implications of the Extension of Education in a Developing Country: Ghana," Report by Regional Director for Africa, Demographic Division (New York: Population Council, 1967), (mimeographed.); Clifton R. Wharton, Jr., "Education and Agricultural Growth: The Role of Education in Early- Stage Agriculture," Education and Economic Development, C. Arnold Anderson and Mary Jean Bowman, eds. (Chicago: Aldine, 1965), pp. 202-28; Archibald C. Callaway, "School Leavers and the Developing Economy of Nigeria," The Nigerian Political Scene, Robert O. Tilman and Taylor Cole, eds. (Durham, N.C.: ‘Duke University Press, 1962), pp. 191-212; Archibald C. Callaway, “Continueing Education for Africa's School Leavers: The Indi- genous Apprentice System," Bulletipgplnter-African Labour Institute, XVIII, No. 1 (February, 1965), pp. 61-73; Phillip Foster, Education and Social Chan e in Ghana (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1965); David EAbernefiy, IThe Political Dilenma of Popular Education: An African Case (Stanford: Stanford"University Press, 1969); andFoodiand'Agri- culture Organization, A ricultural Education and Trainin in Africa, Report of a Seminar he at AhmaduiBE1lo University, Zaria, Nigeiia, 28 June - 7 July, 1965 (Rome: F.A.O., 1966). 40President Julius K. Nyerere has authored several official publi- ca ions on the Tanzanian experiment including Education for Self-Reliance, The Arusha Declaration and Socialism and Rural Development (Dar es salaam: MHniStry of Infbrmation and'deFism, undatedil See alSo the reaction of Philip Foster, "Education for Self-Reliance: A Critical Evaluation," 27 Education in Africa: Research and Action, Richard Jolly, ed., (nairobi: EastAfrican Publishing HOuse,i1969), pp. 81-102. 4lPhilip Foster, “The Vocational School Fallacy in Development Planning," in C. Arnold Anderson and Mary Jean Bowman, op. cit., pp. 142-66, Footnote 39. 42Clifton R. Wharton, Jr., "A Case Study of the Economic Impact of Technical Assistance" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Economics, University of Chicago, 1958), pp. 63-76; and Gordon K. Pierson, "An Investigation of the Contribution of Education to Economic Growth" (unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Washington, 1962). CHAPTER II THE STUDY AREA The study area in which the research was undertaken in 1968-69 is the Southern Savanna (Figure 1). It is one of two savanna regions in Ghana and lies along the coast of the Gulf of Guinea. The Southern Savanna forms a discrete region in terms of climate and vegetation.1 This angular wedge of land, covering about 3,500 square miles in the southern corner of Ghana, is delimited on an annual precipitation map roughly by the 30 and 50 inch isohyets. The vegetation is Guinea savanna woodland with the predominance of grasslands over thicket. The Southern Savanna supports a rural population of about half- a-million of whom the majority are farmers.2 The distribution of popu- lation, however, varies greatly from one part of the region to another (Figure 2). Rural densities in 1960 ranged from an average of 80 people per square mile in the Accra Plains where vast areas remained totally unsettled to 220-300 in the Volta River Valley and in the plains north of Keta. Excluding urban centers,3 the average rural density in the entire study area was 143 people per square mile. This was two times greater than the rural density of Ghana as a whole.4 Selection of the Case Studies A striking feature of the Southern Savanna is the wide range of agricultural development schemes that have been established there 28 29 N H58..— DDL .00: . llll nut! ON 9 1.. o_u_m3n_mm .8: 0mm: 5:939“. .o £350 .296 .8: 23 O. n O n n-__! qm2\bb o .2 5 K0 . . 555...... Mmmwoin mcomewd 3 oz coca .305 El SEEK QZMuw4 -oomT 5 coznacocooz a toamcot. .56 occo>om EucSom .0 =6... ...... i on on 9. o m m a 63:00 52.3.34 ....Q boocaom .oco..mum.....: . c0555 5.53.6532 33.50 Concaom _oco_.occ2£:.ii. , .8... 85.55 8:85 ..... 9 5.8 6.26558 39E ....... x , . 5535 9:5... EquEomzfc 2598000 9.65.0... 309.600 a 325331 c0355 cozuaooca 090...@ Econ 22mizm coouuq 25:6“. t < m u u < m _ >5 £661 .0 raccoon: .oE._c<::G Eb... 800.5 .3383... I. x xx x ~ 8.83 22.3.29. 3 .52 2:. 2:2 85m 6.89m .u_.m<....mm< 0 v < ... \ \ ozmomo a... ... <8... mm ex :w66\6© \6 @638. cmuamgov mmou.EOp mmpws m_ cove: .m>mmmmu «none zoom m>vumcmaoou memeLuu AmnmceuH cmoaaguv mm__e cowumpm xuoumo>w— o. pzonm gucmmmom mango mo compo mempiacou< pmeaupauvcm< mmmp xpwmcm>wcn mu .mpuumu we cpcoz zupmcm>Pca macmsom cam: Ema “>H cmuaocov casemox< mo scam ouamFLm Awnmcmu oupo> cw ammu cmunmzuv coeca .mcpmcm cocoa; swag scam oumum momp pmw>om 63m cacao .mowm mo cucoz oumzimevw< acme cogmvgnaamm inappauumm azocc muuavoca memzum osonum cw upcgum co coco mama mucoum_mm< ucmcweoo smog cone: mmcowumooo ”mmwuaum mmuu mango .m:cm>am cgmguaom on“ c. wuom xvaum mmmo Lao; «no mo muwumwcmuomcmsu on“ we zumee=min~ m4m

41hzoz 38 TABLE 3.--Precipitation Data for the Case Study Areasa Contin- Height uous Above Highest Lowest Annual Station Years Sea Value Value Aver- of Level (year) (year) age Record (feet) Inches First Study Area Keta 50 4 57.27 (1934) 13.88 (1920) 32.69 State Farm (Afife- Weta) 3 25 57.63 (1968) 21.31 (1966) 35.93 Abor 12 50 46.78 (1957) 20.78 (1958) 40.61 Akatsi 4 150 48.92 (1957) 25.82 (1964) 41.18 Ohawu ll 50 52.56 (1963) 23.29 (1964) 41.81 Tadzewu 15 70 56.72 (1960) 29.16 (1964) 43.78 Second Study Area Workers' Brigade Farm 1 250 51.02 (1966) Somanya (Mount Mary School) 5 400 60.99 (1960) 43.79 (1961) 52.11 Kpong 16 71 80.41 (1968) 33.96 (1964) 49.55 Akuse 54 57 77.21 (1968) 24.69 (1932) 44.01 Third Study Area Accra (Airport) 68 194 55.68 (1968) 10.84 (1926) 29.82 Tema 14 46 67.74 (1968) 19.53 (1966) 33.38 Pokoase 16 165 65.81 (1965) 28.90 (1953) 43.85 Nungua (Station) 15 100 55.00 (1968) 19.38 (1966) 37.14 Fourth Study Area Ada 27 17 66.76 (1968) 18.18 (1946) 36.79 Sogakope 15 35 55.23 {1965 19.93 (1964) 35.89 Adidome 11 29 50.07 1959 23.86 (1964) 37.52 Aveyime 10 20 47.56 (1962) 26.86 (1964) 37.74 Sege l 50 40.38 (1961) aGhana Meterological Services, Accra 39 Generally it is utilized for farming only in the wettest areas of the region at the base of the Akwapim Uplands near Kpong and Akuse (Figures 4c and 4d). Among stations listed in Table 3 for which have at least 15 continuous years of record, Kpong has the highest annual average rain- fall, 49.55 inches. Contrast this with the driest station, Accra, which has an annual average of 29.82 inches. This range of roughly 30-50 inches obtains throughout the Southern Savanna. It is interesting to note that commencement of the planting of crops coincides with the beginning of the period of water surplus, around late March or early April (Figure 4). It was determined during the survey that both peasant farmers and professional agronomists at the Agricultural Research Station agreed that planting should begin after three to five inches of rain had fallen. Food farmers interviewed suggested that it was "best to plant after the third or fourth good rain". By implication, and in practice, this occurs in April and generally amounts to about four inches. Station management noted independently that a hygrometric reading of four inches within two or three weeks signaled the beginning of planting. The wisdom of these independently derived but concurring conclusions appears to be substantiated by the water balance data in Figure 4. The lack of dependability of rainfall in the Southern Savanna, however, represents a considerable handicap to the development of agri- culture. Even within limited areas variability is great.16 For example, though the Agricultural Research Station at Nungua and Accra (Kotoka International) Airport are located only seven miles apart, rainfall 40 totals differ by about 25 percent (Table 3). Both demonstrate different dependability patterns. Rainfall deviates considerably and frequently at both stations from means of 37.14 and 29.82 inches, respectively. Unreliable rainfall patterns in the region have focused agronomists' attention upon irrigation techniques. A number of irrigation feasibility studies were conducted in Accra and Ho-Keta Plains during the 1960's. In 1965 following completion of the Akosombo Dam a comprehensive survey of irrigation in the Accra Plains was finished by Kaiser.17 The survey in- dicated that about half, 440,000 acres, of the Plains could be converted to irrigated agriculture (rice, sugar cane, cotton and vegetables) over a 31 to 53 year period with a capital investment of £128, 141,000 ($359,000,000). However, the total and per acre ($815) costs were con- sidered far greater than Ghana could bear. As an outgrowth of this in 1969 a consortium of Italian companies supported a Ghana-Bonifica Joint Project to develop 25,000-40,000 hectares of prime irrigable land in the Accra Plains and to assist in reconditioning facilities for three State Farms producing irrigated rice, including the one at Afife-Weta.l8 The potential for irrigated agriculture in the southern part of the Ho-Keta Plains has also been recognized.19 Surveys have been under- taken by WAKUTI of West Germany20 on the reclamation of 40,000 acres 2] of 25,000 acres on around Keta and Avu Lagoons and by NADECO of Holland Angaw Lagoon (Figure 3). Considerable researchlas been carried out on the feasibility of irrigation in the Volta River flood plain. The first concentrated at- tention began with the establishment of the University of Ghana's 41 Agricultural Research Station at Nungua in 1952 and the Agricultural Ir- rigation Research Station at Kpong in 1954.22 Encouraging results were obtained from research conducted into the suitability of sugar cane, rice, and cotton for irrigated large-scale production. This was followed in 1963 by a Food and Agriculture Organization survey of 85,000 acres along the Lower Volta River (Kpong to Ada), in 1968 by a Commonwealth Develop- ment Corporation study of 25,000 acres at Aveyime, and in 1969 by 2,000 acre FAO experimental rice-sugar cane scheme at Asutsuare.23 Ghana has indicated its desire to followup and coordinate these efforts.24 One also finds a number of minor dams and small dugouts scattered about the Southern Savanna, especially in the Accra Plains. Numerous local cattle raisers have constructed dams and dugouts for water conservation using the example of the Agricultural Research Station at Nungua. These in turn, precipitated the building of Ashaiman Dam in 1968 in the same area by the Irrigation, Reclamation and Drainage Division of the Ministry of Agriculture which plans to irrigate 380 acres (Figure 9). To date the various feasibility studies, research stations, experimental schemes and local initiatives have had only a minor impact on the development of irrigated agriculture in the Southern Savanna. Vegetation The Accra and Ho-Keta Plains are derived savanna which have evolved biotically from a degraded woodland climax.25 Forest today is confined to unsettled upland or riverine areas, such as the Akwapim Ridge and Krobo "Mountain" to the west, or along the tributaries of the Volta River. In the better watered area thickets predominate. Species 42 include the common Dichrostaehysglomerata, found On sandy soils, Fagara zanthoxgloides,Millettia thonnigjj Malacantha ainifolia, and Lonchorarpus sericevus. On old termite-mounds over the gray earths are found small clumps of thicket including a candelabra-like tree, Elaeophorbia drupifera. Other common deciduous shrubs are Securinega virosa, Fluggea virosa, Grewis carpinifolia, Tephrosia elegens, and Anogeissus leicarpus. The occasional tree may be seen in the wettest thickets, especially the giant "silk cotton" (Ceiba pentandra). Thickets are normally wind-aligned with the prevailing Southwesterlies. Moving eastward and away from the coast one finds medium-high grasses of three to four but sometimes over five feet. Vetiveria fulvibarbis is easily the most common and grows extensively over areas of poorly drained black earths.26 Setaria sphacelata and Brachiara falcifera are short steppe grasses found over sandy soils of acidic Dahomeyan gneiss in areas with more than 30 inches of precipitation.27 Scattered trees here tend to be thick-barked and fire-resistant. The impressive Borassus aethiopum palms, used for house beams, are found in poorly drained areas. Other trees include Lgphira lanceolata, Daniellia m, and dwarf oil palms. The latter are of significant economic value as sources of palm oil for cooking, leaves for weaving mats and palm wine for enjoying one's leisure. In the lagoonal areas near the coast there are low mangroves and other saline vegetation.28 Vegetation patterns in the Southern Savanna have been dictated not only by edaphic and water-supply factors, but also by the presence of man. Patterns of vegetation have been influenced by past human settle- ment. Foreign species of trees, such as the mango and the neem, and various 43 thicket shrubs populate hill-top locations where villages were once established. These provide useful clues to one seeking the location of former settlements. Much of the savanna is burned annually.29 Burnings are of two types: (a) uncontrolled, dry-season fires set by hunters to scare up game such as grass cutters and other rodents, and (b) controlled fires by peasant farmers, approximately between February and the beginning of the major rainy season for the purposes of clearing brush and generating a natural source of potash.30 The net result is a pyrogenetic grassland which is floristically distinct from the Guinea and Sudan savannas that cover much of West Africa. The People Unlike the physical environment the people of the Southern Savanna of Ghana are relatively heterogenous in terms of history, language and culture. Major ethnic groups include the Ewe of the Volta Region, the Adangbe peoples of the Accra Plains area of the Eastern Region, and the Ga near Accra (refer to Figure 3 and Table 4). In this section his- torical background and pOpulation characteristics of the major ethnic groups in the region are noted. Historical Background Though the historical record on the peoples of the Southern Savanna has not been varified, it appears that they originally migrated westward along the coast from the Niger Delta area during the Sixteen and Seventeenth Centuries.3l These migrations probably did not pre-date the establishment of the first slave fort by the Portuguese at Elimina 44 .Emp new sex .mazocm :mwcmmwz .maaocm ouch _mcucmu ”mmuapuch .Pcmpad 6c. swam: .mncmz .wmcmcom ._oo4 .Pmace .Pcmnmoanpoz .ascso “mmuapucmo .ommp :_ ooo.mmm we: acce>mm ccoguaom any we covumpanoa .muop use .e==.>um ccmzpzom mg» muwmuao opp umcwneou mcowmmm mp_o> can :cmummm 6:» we meowpm_=goa 6;» mo mcawmewmcgu 6cm mecca on» 06 ppm: uaoa cgmamau acuo< upcgum ammp opasmm omc< xuaum 6:. ocean .mcago :cmommmguzom we mmpaoma meoa< :o_u:awcumwo o_ccquIa m4mmm ccmxaaow on» cwzppz u:_>_~ mmwuwconuaa Pmuop Omega cw cowumpzaon we» mo wean peg» spec so» we. mean vacmmoca «page .ucmucmq mm+ we; open: m we wanna com comp new memp cmmzpon mmcogo coppm_=aoq ucmocoa echo .mm we: open: a we wanna com owpom xmm mg» comp ca .mmpmsme cop can mOFme "aroma xoma .mzmcmu we“ cw umcwwmc mm xgpmmcom 6:. oceans; .mcwcmwm cw macs» muapuxm pan .mcmcoamFIvcm mcmmco: acme .mcmmmcme mmsrucwImcmscmm m>H .Fp>I.Avmmr.muwmmo mamcmu "ecuu<~mxcu:=ou Page» new meowmom .mmwpwco;u=< Peooo eo muwumwcmuumcmgu oweocoum .oom_ .cowumammoa mo mamcmu .ocmzw "mucaomm om + mm mm om ucmucma ouo.-— woo.¢¢~ peace as + mm Pm me mum.mp omp.m~ 66: ~_ I as um .5 mmo.m~ ~e~.mm :mcok um + mu mm mm coo.mm moo._o gucoz op=< Pu + nu em om mem.m mwe.m~ cuaom o_=< mm + no mm mm oem.p~ —op.mm waxouamo Iopw>Imxcuz ~ I mm um um —m_.~ mmm.- mu< m + am wm mm ~mm.~p _m_.mm mmngmamcmquw «comp uoomFImamp mewscmm mapscuu Imaauuo mc=m>mm mucngu cw mapsgmm cw FP< newspaom as» we cowuapaaoa nopuam mafia: cw m=6mcm¢ mcomcma mamc< xuwcozua< ucmocaa xom acoucma ucmucmg canszz coasaz Fmoog pucaa accm>mm econusom mg» mo cowumpanoa pmczm 0;» mo newummcouomcmcquIm u4m

co.c_ + Z 0.00ruueocto... yo Bone-52. . . any +. 0%. 1.0.00 9.0).! ......... VA. .... a 09.533 660.32 \n“ )\\a// 4. o .0 t8... Eopoou .. . wk. MQWS. . o. L... / l v . 6.65.0 2:3 12:1 ......... ououox . «07 84.: z. mnEOBw. ll ....4..x.x . :35 0000! coaoow Ago ......... ...It . ....+..: ... n w — o _. auoom Loc~0031__( . H w 4...... + “on U— — m> ......... . ...: o o 2;... ...:o ......... la- .. .. . 29m 849% .3383 ac) o... Loses. . .. . a . .... <>Z<§Om UTE: . ... . a he: OZDOQ< 035 02m0m4 1 Roz o» r 2.5.3.2 o» L . .0000 91 Background The early activities of the Brigade were very much in contrast to its stated purposes. A 1957 White Paper presented these objectives: The object of the Brigade, then will be to provide useful occu- pation to the unemployed who are unable to secure either formal apprenticeship or steady employment, to afford youth of the country an opportunity to give patriotic services in the develOpment of the country and assist in the execution in the development projects, especially in the rural areas. . .1 Activities were to include the building of schools, low cost housing, wells, dams, and feeder roads. In addition, provision was made to encourage some Brigaders to ". . . work on State Farms as well as frontier and agri- cultural settlements for production of commercial food crops. . ."2 Agri- culture became an increasingly important activity in subsequent years. In September, 1959 a Ghanaian delegation paid a visit to Israel. There they were impressed by the philOSOphy and work of the Fighting Pioneering Youth groups called Npgppl, They combined military preparedness with agricultural training and settlement. When the delegation returned to Ghana they recommended that the Brigade adopt a Npphpl:type pattern.3 In 1960 a team of four ngflpl_officers from Israel was invited to come to Ghana to advise and guide the organization.4 Brigade camps at Ejura, Damongo, and Klukpo-ertoe were reorganized along Npphpl_lines. In addi- tion a new camp was established at Somanya with Israeli technical assistance. Somanya was the only Workers' Brigade farm influenced from its inception by Isreal.5 The Israelis were not integrated into the para-military struc- ture at Somanya but acted as‘advisors.6 They were based in Accra not on the Farm. The impact of the experts from Israel was largely in the technical rather than the ideological realm. From the perspective of the advisors 92 the Brigade lacked the sense of purpose and the spirit which.marked collec- tive farming in Israel.7 The reason for this may be that in Ghana the ob- jective was to overcome unemployment and inadequate food supplies while in Israel the Nggpgl_served real military and settlement functions. In 1965 there were 47 Brigade Farms in Ghana with about 281,000 acres of land of which roughly only ten per cent was cleared and under cultivation.8 The total number of workers was 28,000. When the coup came in February, 1966, the Brigade was in debt to the tune of ¢200,000 (about $280,000). The Kom Commission of Enquiry was constituted to investigate the malpractices of the Brigade and to make recommendations for its future.9 It was revealed that the debt resulted from (a) unauthorized payments to members of the Brigade, (b) unpaid for services rendered in cash and kind to politicians and other Brigaders, (c) inclusion of "ghost" Brigaders of ficticious names on payrolls, and (d) outright theft of Brigade cash and stores.10 Israeli personnel were gradually withdrawn, the last one leaving in July, 1966. The fate of the Brigade remained in limbo during the enquiry of the Kom Commission which eventually endorsed its reconstitution and resuscitation to conform to the original purposes. To achieve a viable economic program the number of Brigaders was reduced to 5,000 by January, 1969.11 The pay of another 2,000 workers was reduced. The continuence of the Brigade was made contingent upon the im- plementation of more effective accounting and auditing procedures, better marketing arrangements, upgraded recruitment methods, and elimination of all military elements in the Brigade. Emphasis was to be placed upon increased productivity. 93 Development of Somanya Workers' Brigade Farm In 1969 the Somanya camp was the largest Workers' Brigade Farm in Ghana, encompassing an area of 7,936 acres (12.4 square miles). The land had been acquired in 1960 with the consent of the Konor Yilo Krobo and his Mptge, the Chief of Trom (Figure 8). The area and the soils were surveyed in late 1961.12 Unfortunately, the 1,000 acres chosen for mechanized cultiva- tion prior to the soil survey publication bore little relationship to the area underlain by the fertile black clay Akuse series ideally suited to this purpose. See the contrast between the cleared/farmed area and Akuse soils in Figure 8. Therefore, it is not suprising that Somanya found difficulty in pro— ducing high yeilds.13 In addition, soil mismanagement retarded development. In the process of demarcating plot boundaries, the humas topsoil, holding the most vital plant nutrients, were bulldozed up into high ridges edging each ten-acre section. The mechanization of cultivation also progressed slowly. Eleven David Brown tractors plus implements were purchased from England to work the 1,000 cleared acres. But frequent breakdowns, partially due to mis- handling by untrained tractor operators, scarcity of spare parts, and inade- quate service facilities reduced efficiency. In view of the Brigade employment objective, it is not surprising that in the first years the labor force at Somanya swelled to more than 200, or about one for every two acres actually brought under cultivation.14 Later the Regional Organizer working in cooperation with the Israelis pared the staff to 84. The highest level of operational efficiency at Somanya seems to have been reached around 1963. 94 rob Eggf 5‘ 318 $355? $525 $353.: as z [-1012 11% ”133E: ‘ ll SOILS AND LAND USE ON THE SOMANYA WORKERS' BRIGADE FARM Old Adapted from maps of Workers' Brigade FIGURE 8 95 The Npphpl_philos0phy did not encourage piece work. Workers were paid by the day. Incentives came only through the desire for promotion in rank, made conspicuous by the wearing of uniforms with insignia. From 1964 onward some 200 extra Brigaders were "dumped" on the Farm to provide employment for a reserve of political supporters.‘5 During the 1968 crop- ping seasons 322 employees were on the payroll, including 256 farmer- workers, 35 equipment operators, and 31 administrative staff. By 1968 the accomplishments of the Somanya Brigade were modest. Some 428 acres were allocated to maize, cassava, sugar cane, groundnuts, tobacco, cowpeas and other vegetables. Yields during the 1968-1969 har- vests were very low due to heavy rainfalls, poor drainage, and poor agronomic planning using existing resources (Table 18). Maize yields for example were three to five times less than other large-scale farms in the Southern Savanna. This pattern was slightly altered in 1969 by dropping tobacco and increasing sugar cane to over 100 acres. The latter was in response to the development of Asutsuare Sugar Factory to be discussed below. Problems of management, mecahnization and marketing continued to confound the efforts of the Somanya Brigade in l969. Laborers experienced delays of up to three months in being paid. Others had wages halved as a punitive measure for past inefficiency. Management was unstable. In nine years there were nine different camp commanders, many apparently having neither administrative nor agricultural experience. Only a third of 12 tractors were operable in l969. Spares were expensive and in short supply, and servicing took place in Accra rather than on the Farm. Brigade manage- ment considered mechanization problems to be the greatest hinderance to development. Very little Farm-produced maize and cassava was marketed 96 TABLE 18.--Crops, Acreages, and Yields on the Somanya Workers' Brigade Farm, 1968-19693 Crops Acreage Yield/Acre Problems Maize 226 296 bags Flooded plots and low potash Cassava 80 Unharvested Flooded plots Groundnuts 53 62 bags Flooded and destroyed (unshelled plots Sugar Cane 41 Unharvested White ants and stemborers Tobacco 18 171 lbs. Flooded plots (Grade l)c Othersb 10 Experimental Cowpeas flooded and for seed multiplication aPlanting: February-April, 1968; record of harvests up to mid-March, 1969; Source: Workers' Brigade, Accra, l969. bCowpeas (approximately 8.4 acres), yams, garden eggs, peppers. cGrade 2 yield: 267 lbs; grade 3 yeild: 356 lbs. locally in Somanya and Agomanya. Since the demand for local food stuffs was considerable this was a source of irritation to many surrounding farmers. Originally the intention was to market locally, but thefts of produce forced Brigade Headquarters to control marketing directly in Accra. This meant limited integration of the Somanya Farm with the local community. Impact on Local Farmers The impact of the Somanya Workers' Brigade Farm will be reviewed in the context of the several change agents in the study area. Other change agents included: the State Sugar Products Corporation with its factory located near Asutsuare, the Ministry of Agriculture extension divisions, and the farmers themselves. Fifty local food farmers, including ten 97 part-time employees of the Workers' Brigade and ten sugar cooperative farmers, were interviewed concerning agricultural innovations and perceived sources of influence in adoption. Data on perceived sources of impact are presented in Table 19. Only 36 innovations have been adopted by the sample. The average of 0.72 adoptions per farmer is the lowest innovation rate among the four case studies. No farmer credited the Workers' Brigade with major influence in adoption. Farmers attributed the primary influence to the extension services (Crop Production Division and Mechanization and Transport Division) of the Ministry of Agriculture based near Somanya (Figure 7). Tractor utiliza- tion was the area of greatest adoption with 16 per cent of the 50 farmers adopting because of Ministry influence, ten per cent because of sugar factory/cooperative influences, and four per cent because of secondary (other farmer) influences. Fertilizer use was adopted by 20 per cent of the sample, 14 per cent of which was again Minsitry influenced. Adoption rates for improved seed and insecticide were low. Nineteen per cent of all adoptions were primarily influenced by the farmers themselves, 25 per cent by the sugar factory/cooperatives, and 56 per cent by the Ministry. The Ministry's extension activities were having a relatively greater impact in the study area due in part to the introduction of a new program in mid-1968. With assistance from the United States Agency for International Development the Crop Production Division initiated an effort to "focus attention and concentrate available resources -- advisory manpower, seed, fertilizers, crop protectants and credit -- upon limited geographic areas with the greatest potential for growing maize, guinea corn, rice and 98 TABLE 19.--Perceived Major Sources of Influence in Adopting New Agricultural Practices by Fifty Farming in the Study Area, 1969 Item Use of Use of Use of Im- Use of In- Tractor Ferti- proved seed secticide/ lizer weedicide Total Interviewed 50 50 50 50 Number adopting 15 10 6 5 Percentages Major Source of Influence: Workers' Brigade 0 O 0 0 Sugar Factory/ cooperatives 10 4 4 0 Ministry of Agriculture 16 14 4 6 Secondary Sources 4 2 4 4 Total Percentage Influenced 3O 20 12 10 Percentage Not Influenced 7O 80 88 9O Total Percentage 100 100 100 100 99 groundnuts."16 Somanya was one of six agricultural districts selected for the "Focus and Concentrate Programme". By April, 1969 41 farmers had been identified for special assistance in planning and production. Inputs were supposed to be made readily available on credit. Agricultural Assistants helped these demonstration farmers prepare farm plans based on current prices and market conditions. Two demonstration farmers were included in the sample. Farm plan data for the two are presented in Table 20. Actual acreage planted by the two farmers fell short of planned acreage which meant that the projected profits (net cash income) could not be achieved. Plan failures for these and other participating farmers were due to lack of credit sources, input inadequacy, and tractor scarcity.17 These problems were common to all farmers in the study area and put brakes on program development and general innovation adoption. The State Sugar Products Corporation influenced the adoption of the use of the tractor, fertilizer and varieties of sugar cane (Table 19). The Corporation in 1969 was supplying its own extension services to some 500 members of 47 sugar cane cooperative societies roughly within a 20 mile radius of the sugar factory.18 Local farmers were particularly at- tracted to the sugar cooperatives because of credit opportunities. 0n rainfed land they were outproducing the Corporation's daily wage laborers who had irrigated plots.19 The Asutsuare factory was experiencing considerable difficulty in achieving the goals for which it was developed. Over the period 1964-1968 Ghana invested about N¢24,000,000 to reduce its dependence on foreign sugar. Sugar imports totaled 58,000 in 1966. The Asutsuare and Komenda20 factories .co_uepgoqmcegu new .mcmop co umoempc_ .ucmL veep .cowumwumsamu _mpwaou ”mom nm~FEouw uo: pan e—muope cw mumoua mom, .cuemz .»o>czm upopme 0 0 .—m.¢¢_F oo.momF m¢.omm om.mm_ mn.m~_ ¢~.m~ ,mm «NF o.~ m.m —.m N o~.mmm oo.mmep om.mmo m~.m~N m~.mmp om.~m mom o o.e m.¢ m.m F msoucm msoucH mpmw vase: wasam zappmm voucmpa smug; sumo tempest uoz peace apmpo» Lonmo acme new m -aweou -oeepa . w. Amxmo\cmzv W nAqu mumou gone; mamm— Egon capo some no women .msou mocmcu< mmmp mom -cH use mumou .Loam4 we mmuoswumm penuu< rogu< umccepa mmmp .mmg< auaum mc~m_gm .mgmxgoz ms» cw magma cowuagpmcosoo age we memo capo ELmu copumpmmtu.om m4mratext of the case studies there would be no “neighborhood effect", that is, no inverse relationship in distance between farmer and scheme. There is an unexpectedly high inverse correlation (-.362), and, thus, the hypothesis is not supported. Local Food Farmer Characteristics, Production and’Innovation The patterns of personal and household characteristics of local food farmers, the nature and problems of production, and agricultural 1' nnovation will be examined in this section. Q a racteristics As in the other case studies we are testing the definition of the so-called "traditional farmer" by reviewing the characteristics of 1Oca‘l food farmers. In the Workers' Brigade Study area the dominant Ethnic group, the Krobo Adangbe, have a history of agricultural success. I" the nineteenth century the Manya Krobo developed the h_u_z_a_ company Sys tern to exploit cocoa production in the forests beyond the Akwapim Ridge (Figure 7).23 Directed by the Konors of Odumasi they succeeded i n ‘5 ncreasing Krobo holdings in the rich Cocoa Belt by seeding out (:1 OSe‘ly-knit companies of cocoa farmers. The Krobo contribution to the Ghanaian cocoa industry has been considerable. Therefore, in this area the traditional farmer has always been looked upon as a productive farmer. TABLE 22.--Factor Loadings 104 Defining Traditional FarmerESecond Case Study (N=50) Characteristics Fagtor Fagtor 'Traditional Farmer (a) Domestic Characteristics (1) Age 1 .4488 -.4356 (2) Years Resident 9 .2680 -.3515 (3) Years Farmer 10 .4070 -.5351 (4) Household Size 13 .2790 -.3808 (5) Number Wives 14 .2461 -.2497 (6) Number Children 16 .3596 -.4472 (7) Formal Education 51 .0504 .6127 (8) Stool Land Tenure 83 .3327 -.0355 (b) Productivity Characteristics (1) Acres Savanna Crops 31 .4850 .2708 (2) Acres Cassava 32 .5116 -.0666 (3) Acres Tomatoes 36 .1454 .0075 (4) Acres Vegetables 37 .2108 .0937 ( C) 50 .7931 .2558 \ Innovation 105 The ethnicity of the study area is mixed reflective of the in- migration of non-Krobo into the study area. Of the 50 farmers inter- viewed two-thirds (68 per cent) were Krobo, one-fifth (20 per cent) Ewe, and the balance (12 per cent) other. Twelve interviewee villages Table 23 presents the population were Krobo, five were non-Krobo. See Figure characteristics of interviewees' villages in the study area. Most villages were over 300 and in 1960 had grown considerably over 7. Krobo and non-Krobo farmers manifested the intercensal period from 1948. srinfilar characteristics, with the expected exception that the Krobo had greater years of residence and farming experience in the study area. Population characteristics of the sample by ethnicity are shown in Table 24. The typical farmer in the sample of 50 was 45.9 years old, had lived in his village for 27.7 years, and had 21.8 years of farming Eighty-six per cent owned or lived in their own compounds; One-fifth (20 per cent) of the home buildings The ex De ri ence. '4 per cent lived in houses. "ewe constructed of cement blocks and the rest were of swish (mud). tyD‘i cal household was composed of 10.2 persons including the farmer, 3" average of 1.3 wives and 6.8 living children, of whom 3.9 lived at home. The average number of school age children (6 years and older) in these households was 5.1 of whom 80 per cent had received some formal edu cation. Among ten Ewe informants 100 per cent of their children had schooling. Syncretism was conmonly practiced in the study area, however. 36 per cent of the sample were nominally animistic, 28 per cent Presby- ter‘i an, 12 per cent Methodist, and 24 per cent other religions. 106 TABLE 23.--Population Characteristics of the Villages of the Workers' Brigade Study Area Village or Stoola No. Inter- 1960 Popu— 1948 Popu- Other viewed lationb lationb Location AkawieC (stranger) 2 37 41 Akuni Ewe 2 nd nd Akode Ewe 2 21 1 958d Doadagbe Ewe 3 54 O Volta Resettle- ment Authorityc (stranger) 6 O O Trom Yilo Krobo 6 492 88 Okpe ertesi Yilo Krobo 1 582 72 Abokobi Yilo Krobo l 926 179 Ogome Yilo Krobo 5 919 156 Sra Yilo Krobo 3 2,043 515 Somanya Yilo Krobo 5 9,258 2,485 New Okwenyac Yilo Krobo 3 0 0 Okwenyae Manya Krobo 4 329 135 Odumasi Manya Krobo 2 4,519) 3,354 Hwekper Manya Krobo l ) 213 Kwajoenya Manya Krobo 1 ) nd I"'ar'tyukpongunor Manya Krobo 3 1,131 1,218 Total 50 aSource: field data. Also refer to Figure 7. bSource: Ghana, Census of Population, 1960, I and II, op. ci ., F0Otnote 4, Chapter III. N cVolta Resettlement Authority stranger village is called "Somanya he“! Town;" constructed of cement blocks in the 1960's, it was to provide Domes for Krobos displaced by the flooding of Lake Volta behind Akosombo a2"? . However, few Krobos lived here. It was used by various peoples n temporary housing. Akwale's population consisted of Gurma and other Ohthern tribes. no dFour villages were encompassed in the 1948 count. Akode showed appreciable change in population from 1948 to 1960. 1: eSince 1960 New Okwenya has been formed by a dissident element "20'" Okwenya. Originally all were from Old Ningo on the coast. The Wh? 0kwenya faction sides with the Yilo Krobo on the land tenure issure, ‘9 Okwenya remains in the Manya Krobo camp. 107 m.F m.om _.m m.m m._ N.o_ m.FN a.a~ Romy _aoo» toe mmusm>< o.fi o.mw N.e 5.0 a._ o.m m.m_ a.mp “mpg eaeex-eoz 0., 5.5“ m.m o.n m._ m.oF m.m~ m.Pm Aamv agate umpmuaum cmcnpwgu mm< upon mucmwcoaxu meant cmcvp_;u Foonum cmLquzu mm>_3 -mmso: aerate; ucmuwmmm azogo to .02 ucmu Loo to .02 to .oz to .oz cw .oz meow» mgmm> o_ccum some ..aea seeom aeaoeem .mamxaoz may :_ .»u_u_=:pm An m_qsem an“ ac ”o_gmaamuaeaeeg eeege~aqem...sN.mgm§K 108 To obtain a definition of the "traditional farmer" data on the domestic, productivity and innovation characteristics of the 50 farmers have been subjected to factor analysis. See Table 22. The process of analysis was discussed in the preceeding case. The second hypothesis postulates that the traditional farmer can be defined by conmon domestic characteristics but not necessarily in terms of low productivity or lack of innovation. Factor 1 in Table 22 demonstrates a high degree of asso- ciation among domestic characteristics, as well as reasonably strong measures of productivity (savanna and cassava acreages) and a high inten- si ty score for innovation. Factor 2 is presented for purposes of con- trast. Therefore, the case study data support the second hypothesis. flodu ction and Problems The primary crops of the study area are cassava, maize, yams, Table 25 presents data on Dappers, tomatoes, okro and other vegetables. Eighty- tJWGB savanna food crops and acreages of the study area sample. E”.th per cent of the farmers were raising cassava, 62 per cent maize, and 6‘) IJer cent vegetables. TWelve per cent were raising sugar cane. Nearly “31 ‘F (48 per cent) practiced interplantations of crops, especially with Gas Sava. The total acreage of the 50 farmers was 192, a mean of 4.8 acres ar'C1 Inedian of 3.1 acres, ranging in size from 1/2 to 100 1/2 acres. Ca1- cu] ation of acreages was based on interviews not chain and compass mea- Su Fement though the acreages of two study area farms were satisfactorily Var‘i fied by pacing off distances in the field. Farmer estimates were 109 TABLE 25.--Savanna Crops and Acreages for Fifty Farmers in the Workers' Brigade Study Area, 19696 Crop No. of farmers Acreages Cassava 44 (20) 75 Maize 31 (15) 56 Vegetablesb 30 (5) 38 Yams 8 (2) l4 Otherc 7 (3) 9 Total 50 (24) 192 aField data collected February-March, 1969. Numbers in parentheses represent farmers interplanting this crop with other crops. bVegetables include: peppers (16), tomatoes (10), okro (9), garden eggs (3), onions (1), and sweet potatoes (1). cOther crops are: plantains, groundnuts, rice, pineapples, oil Pa 1 m , cocoyams . probably suspect since the traditional h_uz_a system of the Krobo did '1C31: employ areal measures. 0n the other hand, the areal concept of acre was known to most informants. This was presumably because of the exis- tence of telegraph poles spaced roughly 70 feet apart, which distance ScILIIared equals an acre. Several interviewees said they used 12-fathom "0 Des (about 70 feet in length) to lay out square "poles" for farming. T I"(at use of tractors in the study area also tended to reinforce thinking i 7‘ ‘terms of areal acre measurements. As in other parts of the Southern Savanna the pattern of labor L111:‘i‘lization was in the state of flux. Whereas the use of hired labor was uncommon before 1950,24 70 per cent of the sample were employing it 110 in 1969. This was primarily to overcome labor bottlenecks during weeding Labor distribution was based both on the spatial (acres) and Rates ranged from N¢4.00 to N¢10.00 periods. temporal (hours, days) measurements. per acre, or N¢0.50 to N¢O.80 per day, depending upon the difficulty of the work. Hired laborers were commonly Northerners living in nearby stranger villages. Labor bottlenecks during the planting season were also overcome by use of hired labor, but as noted earlier tractors were used by 30 per cent of sample for this same purpose, i.e. land prepara— tion prior to cultivation. The Krobo observed a land taboo. The Manya tended to rest the 'land (prohibit the use of machete or hoe for weeding or planting) on 'Thursday and Sundays while the Yilo observed Monday and Friday taboos. Ewe and other "strangers" living among the Yilo also followed the Yilo roattern. The taboo was observed by 76 per cent of the 50 farmers. In cxontrast, among the ten sugar cane cooperative members interviewed, Incane observed the local taboo for commercial cane production, though two (lid observe it for domestic food production. Krobo land tenure patterns are evolving. In 1969 land sales and FDLJrchases were becoming more common but have existed for over a century according to Pogucki. Among the sample allodial rights in land were hEéld by both kinship groups and individuals. Twenty-two Krobo (64 per Cent) farmed family (kinship group) land, eight (24 per cent) had rented or ‘IGEEISed land from other Krobo (excluding tree rights), and four (12 per ‘3fiirlt) had purchased land. Thirteen non-Krobo had received permission 1rhom the Krobo divisional Matse (chiefs) to rent or buy Krobo land. 111 Three non-Krobo lived on Volta Resettlement Area land owned by the government. The Krobo social structure is patrilineal, patrilocal, The Konor Yilo Krobo and Konor patriarchal and theocratic in origin. The Manya Krobo control land tenure through their divisional Matse. land tenure situation appeared to be quite fluid with increasing accep- tability of land sale and ownership among the Krobo. Major sources of capital among the sample of 50 farmers were sale of crops (32 per cent) and income from job wages (32 per cent). Table 26 displays the major sources of capital of food farmers, food farmers who vuere also members of sugar cooperatives, and food farmers employed by the Idorkers' Brigade. It is interesting to observe that the exclusively food farmers group was primarily dependent upon sale of crops (46 per cent) for capital, cooperative members upon bank loans from the Agri- cnxltural Development Bank (60 per cent), and Workers' Brigade farmers upon job wages (100 per cent). The major problems among farmers of the study area were inadequate <:r~edit, diseases and pests (white ants, insects, rodents), and scarcity (Df’ labor. An inventory of the perceived problems of the sample is pre- sented in Table 27. The patterns of problems of the food farmer, coopera- tli‘ve member, and Workers' Brigade groups were generally similar, with the exception that the for c00perative members the major difficulty was COnsidered to be inadequate management of the sugar factory and related bad handling of marketing and transport. The leading first-mentioned problem overall was lack of credit. 112 TABLE 26.--Major Sources of Capital for Fifty Farmers in the Workers' Brigade Study Area, 1969 Major Source Food Food Farmers, Food Farmers Total Farmers also Employed by Cooperative Workers' Members Brigade No. % No. % No. % No. % Sale of Crops 14 46 2 20 O 0 16 32 Personal Loans 10 33 0 0 0 O 10 20 Bank Loans 2 7 6 6O 0 O 8 16 Job Wages 4 l4 2 20 10 100 16 32 Total 30 100 10 100 10 100 50 100 Innovation Among the sample the average number of innovations was 0.72. Thirty-six adoptions were made by 24 farmers, the rest adopted no in- novations. In the “11094109 tables innovations has been compared with indices of travel experience (Table 28), radio accessibility (Table 29), extension service contact (Table 30) and formal education (Table 31). The third hypothesis assumes that innovation among farmers is directly related to measures of farmer productivity, susceptability to scheme impact, and extension service contact, travel experience, and access to radios. In this case study there are direct correlations between innovation and all the above variables except scheme impact. However, though productivity (.352) and travel (.305) correlations stand relatively higher, none of the coefficients is high. Therefore, TABLE 27.--Inventory of Perceived Problems of Peasant Farmers, Coopera- 113 tive Members and Workers' Brigade Employees in the Study Area, 1969a Problem Food Food Farmers, Food Farmers Totals Farmers also Employed by COOperative Workers' Members Brigade 1. Credit/money 26 (20) 4 (2) 6 (3) 36 (25) 2. Diseases/ white ants/ insectS/ rodents l6 (4) 3 (l) 5 (l) 24 (6) 3. Labor supply 7 (0) l (0) 5 (2) l3 (2) 4. Management of factory/mar- keting/ transport 1 (O) 7 (4) l (0) 9 (4) 5. Tractor avail- ability 2 (1) 2 (l) 4 (2) 8 (4) 6. Rainfall/vil- lage water supply 2 (0) l (O) 2 (1) 5 (l) 7. Fertilizer availability 1 E0) 0 (0) 3 (0) 4 (O) 8. Othersb 5 2) l (0) l (0) 7 (2) possible for each interviewee. aNumbers in parentheses represent the number of people who said that this was their most serious problem. bInclude: One or more answers were land no good (2), no seed (1), family too large (1), maize costs too much (1), fire (1), corrupt cooperative leaders (1). 114 TABLE 28.--Travel Experience and Adoption of Innovations Among Study Area Food Farmers, l969 Travel Number of Inno- Farmer Innovation Experiencea vations Adopted Totals Index 0 1 2 3 4 No. % 1 (most experienced) O O l 0 0 l 2 2.00 2 0 1 1 0 0 2 4 1.50 3 2 5 0 1 0 8 16 1.00 4 8 3 0 1 0 12 24 ‘ 0.50 5 9 4 6 0 0 19 38 0.84 6 (least experienced) 7 l O O O 8 16 0.13 Totals 26 14 8 2 0 50 100 0.72 a1=travel to another region, Kumasi, Takoradi, Tamale, many other areas of Ghana and abroad; 2=to another region, Kumasi, Takoradi, Tamale and many other areas of Ghana; 3=to another region, Kumasi, Takoradi, and some other areas of Ghana; 4=to another region, Kumasi, and some other local places; 5=to another region and a few other local places; 6=only traveled in this region. TABLE 29.--Radio Accessibility and Adoption of Innovations Among Study Area Food Farmers, l969 Status Number of Inno- Farmer Innovation vations Adopted Totals Index 0 l 2 3 4 No. % Have radio 6 4 5 l 0 16 32 1.06 Have access 11 5 2 l 0 19 38 0.63 Have no radio and no access 9 5 1 0 0 15 30 0.47 Totals 26 14 8 2 0 50 100 0.72 115 TABLE 30.--Extension Services Contact and Adoption of Innovations Among Study Area Food Farmers, l969 Extension Service Number of Inno- Farmer Innovation Contact vations Adopted Totals Index 0 l 2 3 4 No. % Food Farmers Contact 7 9 2 0 0 18 36 0.72 No contact 9 2 l 0 O 12 24 0.25 Total Food Farmers 16 ll 3 0 0 3o 50 Food Farmers, also COOperative Members Contact 2 2 2 l 0 7 14 1.29 No contact 0 O 2 l O 3 6 2.33 Total Co-op Members 2 2 4 2 O 10 20 Food Farmers Employed by Workers' Brigade Contact 1 O O 0 0 l 2 0.00 No contact 7 1 l 0 0 9 18 0.33 Total Brigade Employees 8 l 1 O O 10 20 Totals Contact 10 11 4 l O 26 52 0.85 No contact 16 3 4 l 0 24 48 0.58 Totals 26 14 8 2 O 50 100 0.72 116 TABLE 31.-~Formal Education and Adoption of Innovations Among Study Area Food Farmers, l969 Formal Education Number of Inno— Farmer Innovation Attempted vations Adopted Totals Index 0 l 2 3 4 No. % None 11 8 l 1 0 21 42 0.62 Primary 3 1 0 0 0 4 8 0.25 Middle 10 4 5 l 0 20 40 0.85 Advanceda 2 l 2 0 O 5 10 1.00 Totals 26 14 8 2 O 50 100 0.72 aIncludes: one informant with special/commercial education and four with secondary school education. the case study data are inconclusive in support of the innovative farmer hypothesis. The fourth hypothesis postulates that formal education is not related to agricultural productivity or innovation. The formal education hypothesis is supported by the case study data. The Education Index shows no strength of correlation with pro- ductivity (.092) or innovation (.149). Summary The second case study has focused on the Somanya Workers' Brigade Farm which was aided in its development by Israeli technical assistance. The Brigade was formed in 1957 under Nkrumah to overcome unemployment through provision of jobs in local development projects 117 as well as provide a body of supporters for political activities. Through mid-l969 the Somanya Farm had made only modest progress toward the economic production of local food crops, with a miniscule 428 acres producing low yields in its best year (1968). Problems of management, mechanization and marketing continued to plague the scheme at the time of writing. The impact of the Brigade Farm on local food farmers was the lowest among the four case studies. The Impact Index was only 10.4 per cent. Greater influence in innovation adoption came from the ex- tension services of the Ministry of Agriculture and the sugar factory land cooperatives of the State Sugar Products Corporation. A factor lanalysis of the domestic characteristics of the local farmer provided ea definition of the so-called "traditional farmer". A survey of food [aroduction showed the typical study area farmer grew a median of 3.1 axzres, primarily cassava, maize and vegetables. Seventy per cent of the sample employed hired labor, largely for weeding, and 30 per cent used the tractor, primarily for land preparation. The land tenure situa- ti on was fluid with an apparent increased frequency of land sale and purw:hase. Major sources of capital were sale of crops and job wages (32 per cent each). The greatest perceived problems were inadequate credit, diseases and pests, and scarcity of labor. An average of only 0-72 innovations had been adopted. The traditional farmer and formal education hypotheses are sup- ported by the case study data: the scheme impact hypothesis is not 118 supported by the data; and the innovative farmer hypothesis is only weakly supported and is, therefore, inconclusive. FO0TNOTES--CHAPTER IV 1Ghana, White Paper on the Builders' Brigade Act, 1957 (Accra: State Publishing Corporation for Ministry of Information, 1957), p. 1. 2Ioid. 3Mordechai Kreinin, Israel and Africa, A Study in Technical Co- 0 eration (New York: Praeger, 1964), p. 1002 It should be emphasized t at t e Nachal is distinct from the more famous Kibbutz and Moshav collective settlements which have no military function. In tfiis co - nection see Ghana, Minority Report of the Commission Appointed to Enquire into the Functions, Operation and Administration of the Workers' Bri adéITACCra: State Publishing Corporation for Ministry of Informa- tlon, 967), p. 3. 4Interview with Amos Ganor, First Secretary, Embassy of Israel, Accra, May 7, 1969. It seems likely that the Israeli example influenced the Brigade many years before actual Ghanaian-Israeli contact. See Ghana, White Paper on the Report of the Commission of Enguiry into the Functions, Operation and Administration 0flthe Workers' Brigade, 1968 (No. 8; Accra: ‘State‘Publishing Corporation, 1968), p. 3} 5Interviews with S. O. Adjin-Tettey, Acting Principal Agri- cultural Officer, Workers' Brigade National Headquarters, Accra, 25 January, 1969, and 9 May, 1969. I would like to extend my apprecia- tion to Mr. Adjin-Tettey for his support and his permission to conduct research at Somanya and for the cooperation of the Farm Staff. 6Interview with William Baffo, former Regional Organizer for the Workers' Brigade from 1962 to 1964 and a key figure in the develop- ment of the Somanya camp, Accra, 7 May, 1969. At the time of the in- terview Mr. Baffo was an officer in the Cocoa Division of the Ministry of Agriculture. 7Kreinin, op. cit., p. 101, Footnote 3. 8Ghana, Ministry of Agriculture, Division of Economics and Statistics, Statistics of Large-Scale, Specialized, Institutional, Cooperative, and Young Farmers' Lea ue Fanning and Service Stations, 1965 ("Agricultural Census , , op. cit., Footnote 8TCh—apter III. 119 120 9Ghana, The Minority Report, 0 . cit., Footnote 3; and Ghana, The Majority Report of the Commission Appointed to Enquire into the Finctiongg Operation and Administration ofithe WOrkers' Bri ade (Accra: State Publishing Corporation for MTni stry of Information, loGhana, White Paper on the Report of the Commission of Enquiry into the Functions, Operations and’Administration of the—workers1 Brigade, pp: eit., pp. 4-5,7F00tnote 4. 1]Sunday Mirror, Accra, 26 January, 1969. 120. A. Mensah-Ansah, Rgport on the Soils of the Somanya Workers' Brigade Mechanized Farm, TechnicalTReport 55 (Kumasi: Agricultural Research Ihstitute, 1963). This survey was completed in December, 1961. Apparently, few copies were produced. At the time of this author's research in 1969 no copy was in the hands of farm management at Somanya. 13For example in its first years the Brigade got one bag of cowpeas per acre as compared with 25 bags per acre in other parts of Ghana. Interview, William Baffo, op. cit., Footnote 6. 14Interview with E. R. Baah, Camp Commander, Somanya Workers' Brigade, 1 March, 1969. 15Interview, William Baffo, op. cit., Footnote 6. 16Files of the Somanya Crop Production Division, dated September, 1968; expanded at interviews with Agricultural Officer J. K. Wiredu, Somanya, numerous times in March, 1969; see also Ray Johnson, "Focus and Concentrate Programme" (Accra: United States Agency for International Development, 1966). (Mimeographed, 10 p.) ' 17Interview with the U.S.A.I.D. Coordinator of the "Focus and Concentrate Programe," Dr. Fred Marti, who indicated major aspects of the probject were subject to evaluation and revision, 28 May, 1969. See also United States Agency for International Development, "Pro- cedures for Preparing a Farm Plan" (Accra: May, 1969). (Mimeographed). 18State Sugar Products Corporation, "Acreage in Respect of Each of the Sugar Cane Cooperative and Individual Farms," Asutsuare, l969 (Mimeographed, 3 p); and interviews with C. Coussey, Manager, State Sugar Products Corporation Factory, Asutsuare, 28 and 29 January, 1969. 19According to the Principal Agriculturalist of the Corpora- tion; also see Reusse, op. cit., p. 56, Footnote 15, Chapter III. 121 20The Komenda mill is located on the Gulf of Guinea between Takoradi and Cape Coast. Visited 19 November, 1968, at which time representatives of both Pakistani and Nigerian management were interviewed. 2lReusse, op. cit., p. 51, Footnote 15, Chapter III. 22This analysis of the Somanya Brigade's impact does not accord at all with that provided in Kreinin, op. cit., p. 102, Footnote 3. Kreinin, on the basis of no documented eVl ence, describes the scheme in the early 1960's as a "show place" with considerable "demonstration effect" upon local farmers. 23Works on Krobo agriculture include: W. J. Field, "The Agri- cultural System of the Manya-Krobo of the Gold Coast," Africa, XIV, No. 2 (April, 1943), 54-65; Polly Hill, 0 . cit., Footnote 5, Chapter I; John M. Hunter, "Cocoa Migrations and Patterns of Land Ownership in the Densu Valley near Suhum, Ghana," Transactions, Institute of British Geographers, No. 33 (December, 1963), 61-87; W. ManShard, "Agrarische Organizations foe Men fur den Binnenmarkt' bestimmter Kulturen im Waldgurtel Ghanas (Huza System of the Krobo)," Erdkunde, II, No. 3 (1957), 215-32; Seth LaAnyane, "A Strip System 0? Farming in Ghana," The Economic Bulletin of Ghana, IV, No. 1 (January, 1960), 6-12;' andINene Azzu Mite Kole, "The Historical Background of Krobo Customs," Transactions of the Gold Coast and Togoland Historical Society, I, Part 4 (1955), 133-40. 24R. J. H. Pogucki, Gold Coast (Ghana) Land Tenure in Adangme Customary Law (2nd ed.; Accra: 1968), p. 8. CHAPTER V THE THIRD CASE STUDY: THE NUNGUA AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH STATION AND LOCAL FARMERS The third case study focuses on the Agricultural Research Station of the University of Ghana, located at Nungua, and local food farmers. The scheme is situated about five miles from the Gulf of Guinea, and about the same distance from the outskirts of Accra and Tema (Figure 9). Despite its proximity to the most urbanized area of Ghana, the Agri- cultural Research Station itself is in sparesely-settled savanna. In the surrounds there are small villages without piped water, electricity or modern roads, where one can see the lights of Accra by night and hear the din by day. The dominant ethnic group here is the Ga. Again the objectives of this study, as with the others, are: (a) to review the background and development of the scheme, (b) to examine its impact on local farmers in the context of other sources of influence, and (c) to look at some of the characteristics of these farmers in terms of agricultural innovation and production. The data will be used to test the hypotheses presented in the introductory chapter. Background and Development OT’the Scheme The Agricultural Research Station was established in 1952, earlier than any of the other case study schemes and five years 122 123 AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE UNIVERSITY FARM AREA l ‘o 0 <1 \ o. $ 1 ANIMAL’HUSMNDPY' (. \ IIVISDN I y. (mam HERD) 5-45 \ o .o \p .. . 'MA’J‘VISHDJ 5 . o \ Mi NUN ¢ UA University Agric. Research Siation...lIlm —m 5. Ministry of Agriculture Divisions. .. E ‘ «moo Lagoon Private Tar-ls ..... Kposni Lagoon TESHIE 0 F All-leather road . . = L F Dry season road or path ., U cam. kraal . 0 Permanent watering points 3"?» Numbers of runners inlerviewed . (2) L . Field data I969. wafer polnis—kraals after Apn ' ”05,7 reb FIGURE 9 124 before Ghanaian independence. Its aims were to initiate research into the many unsolved mysteries of tr0pical agriculture and to provide professional training for Ghanaians in the agricultural sciences.1 Background The Station at Nungua was set up to tackle a myriad of research problems, since very little was known about the climate, vegetation, soils and general agronomic potential of the Accra Plains. Investiga- tion was undertaken on these topics as well as irrigation potential, fertilizer responses, exotic crop and animal adaptability to the tr0pics, diseases, mechanized farming, and management practices for land and livestock.2 At its foundation in 1952 the Agricultural Research Station at Nungua received G £1,000,000 ($2,800,000) ". . .for use on capital expenditure connected with the teaching of Agriculture and the associated sciences. . ." This grant was made to the University College of the Gold Coast from colonial government resources and allowed the Station to initiate a program ". . .for educational and experimental work in arable agriculture, pasture management and animal husbandry."3 In addition, extension work was identified as an important ob- jective of the Station. The marriage of basic research to the local environment was recognized as important for ". . .the early trans- mission of new ideas and plant materials to the working farmer. . ."4 Contact was made by the first Station management with local food farmers and cattle rearers.5 This began with the purchase of about 992 acres of land from the Ga of the Nungua stool (lineage) in 1952 and continued 125 with the acquisition of livestock from local cattlement in Katamanso and Maijaw (Figure 9). This attempt to integrate scheme activities with the local environment stands in contrast to the approaches of the State Farm and Workers' Brigade. At the outset the Station concentrated research on both creps and livestock. Even irrigation research was undertaken until 1954 when this work was largely transferred to the University's Agricultural Irrigation Research Station at Kpong. At Nungha experiments were started on irrigated bananas, oil palm and cocoa, and the rainfed production of oranges, cassava, beans, pigeon peas, pineapples, a range of vegetables, millet and rice. Gradually these crops were replaced by silage-feed cr0ps such as maize, groundnuts, and sorghum as the Station moved toward livestock research. Animal science studies got underway during 1953-55 with the purchase of about 30 head of local cattle. Efforts were made to fence pastures (for the first time on the Accra Plains), refine and improve pasture management techniques, and acquire more livestock. Local varie- ties of sheep, pigs, and some poultry were purchased to initiate pro- grams of cross-breeding with imported animals. Blackheaded Persian and Wiltshire Horn sheep were introduced generating a new local breed called the Black Headed Nungua. English-bred Large White pigs were also brought in. Plans were laid for the importation of Jersey semen to upgrade the milk production of local breeds. Growing numbers of livestock made mandatory a program of animal health research which began. In addition, a number of socio-economic studies of local cattle rearing by the Ga and Fulani were started.6 126 Development of the Agricultural Research Station Aside from the experiments, there were visible signs of change during the early years. Most important among these were the fencing of 1,000 acres and the construction of a dam and 400 acre-foot reser- voir (Figure 10). The farm layout was designed to parallel soil dis- tribution. Most buildings were erected on the well-drained sandy Simpa and Simpa-Agawtaw Series. Major soil groups and 1968 cropping patterns by section are given in Table 32. Because of the importance of cattle feeds, grassland protection plots were established in 1956 to assess changes in savanna vegetation including browse plants. When the plots were reanalyzed in 1966, it was found that woody plants, especially Verronia senegalensis, were rapidly replacing the grasslands that continued to dominate annually burned lands.7 In 1958 an artificial insemination program began using imported deep-frozen Jersey semen. The objective was to upgrade the milk- producing ability of the common local Zebu breed known as Sanga. The first generation Jersey-Sanga crosses were found to be superior milk producers to all subsequent forward and back-crosses. Ten or more pounds of milk per day were obtained, about ten times the production of local Sanga.8 In 1961 pasturage was expanded from 220 to 968 acres with the purchase of the Station Annexe (Figure 9).9 This attenuated northwest projection of the original farm was later developed on a commercial basis as an independent unit.lo By 1969 the Station was almost completely 127 o_ maze: 2.2... 5.35 .oom .o_._u< Ea: quoo< 0:2 0:0 M s g 5 o O— ....... !Uaaac than a ......... .53 9.58 U ........ can ,h—‘gx h ......... 0..“ '8'“ w ......... :05“ 3:00 m ......... ah.‘ 9.30 c ...... «030; tion a ...... gla’ g N ......... 9.8. 38 — ............. 3:5 :3 ..... mOZBéDo ’ ........ ‘an £~B .......ggoh’—; . . . . . g—l UGO—“$050 .......... gar—00 m \\ 32302-33: ....... 6.!“ 08:0“. . . . . . . . . . . Kipp—00 U 3330a<6o5m . . . gsvom ”gt . u o ...... “a.” 338‘ «am goon. 082:5 " u M moron 3338< l ............ g ...... «Or—Um 095m ozBB 38m ....... 0 ooooooooooo O I. I ........... on o OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO O ........... .......... coca ......... oooooooo ....... 00000000 a ooooooo I oooooooooo ..... ..... oooooo 0 0.0 I no ccccc zo_._.<._.w Iom.—._wmw>.z: NI... mo z<.._n_ oao ooooooo ..... no. 33N3$ 3H1. NISLI'IO SWUVA ,SBBAO'IMS I 2 128 TABLE 32.--Acreage Cropped in 1968 and Soi1 Type by Sections--Agri— cu1tura1 Research Station (Nungua) Section Maize Sorghum Soil Series and Comp1esesa’b:c 1 25.07 . . Akuse 2 17.43 , . . Agawtaw, Simpa-Agawtaw 3 29.03 . . Simpa-Agawtaw, Akuse-Agawtaw 4 5.92 . . Akuse-Agawtaw 5 16.57 . . Simpa, Agawtaw 6 . 12.92 Akuse-Agawtaw 7 . . Agawtaw 8 19.39 Akuse-Agawtaw Subtota1s 94.02 32.31 Tota1 126.33 A; aAkuse Series: composed of three-feet-thick black and dark- brown clays; natura11y fertile but either very sticky in the presence of water or brick-hard in its absence; require mechanization with heavy imp1ements, and drainage system; but mechanization is often difficu1t. bSimpa Series: composed of six inches to three feet of sand or sandy 10am with some c1ay impregnations; usua11y we11 drained; easi1y eroded. CAgawtaw Series: occurs on 1ower s10pes; composed of four to six inches of gray fine sand to fine sandy 10am over impermeable sandy c1ay; easi1y eroded; but often we11 suited to mechanization. Source: Fi1es of the Agricu1tura1 Research Station (Nungua), passim. 129 devoted to research on livestock. Crop production consisted solely of maize and sorghum for silage-feed, as demonstrated in the Table 32. Animal populations increased to 500 head of cattle, 250 sheep, 120 goats, 60 pigs, and almost 20,000 fowls. Research on livestock in- cluded both beef and dairy cattle breeding, sheep and goat improve- ment, and investigations into pasture improvement. Unfortunately, economic pressures within the Ghanaian economy had forced a reduction of the Station recurrent budget to about N¢100,000 per year in the late 1960's.11 The research and extension capacity of the Station were seriously challenged as a result. Despite limited finances extension work continued to be under- taken by the Station through the late 1960's. Local cattlemen were the major beneficiaries, especially those in the Katamanso and Ashaley Botwe areas (Figure 9). Free or inexpensive services were provided including service bulls to upgrade local breeds. Additionally, prior to 1960 the Station provided tick spray and a variety of other drugs to maintain the health of local herds.12 After 1960 cattlement were largely dependent upon the Animal Health Division and commercial es- tablishments for animal medical supplies. Some cattlemen even bought bulls from the Station. Eight animals were sold in Ashaley Botwe and Katamanso in 1966-67 and four in 1968-69. The Station was also influencing the livestock watering practices of local cattlement though this was not an explicit segment of the ex- tension program. Prior to the building of the Station Dam in 1952-53, permanent watering points did not exist in the study area nor invirtually 130 any other part of the Southern Savanna. Formerly, because of seasonal shortages transhumance was practiced by cattle rearers in search of water and pasturage. Thirteen dams existed in the study area in 1969 as shown in Figure 9. The impetus for these was the station dam in large measure. Speaking to this point in 1965 Ahn Stated: Although the University of Ghana Agricultural Research Station has not been directly involved in the construction of most of these new dams outside the farm, there is no doubt that the original dams in the area, those built by them on the station, showed the local cattle owners how water shortages can be over— come at a reasonable cost and by their example contributed con- siderably to the present much improved position. There still are dry season shortages, but it is clear that the lead set by the University Fann at Nungua has already done much to improve the position and this is, perhaps, the most striking single re— sult of the present survey. The Station was thus having a positive influence on local cattlement. The impact on local food farmers is next to be considered. Impact on Local Farmers The impact of the Agricultural Research Station will be re- viewed in the context of the several change agents in the study area. Other change agents included the extension services (Crop Production and Mechanization and Transport Divisions) of the Ministry of Agriculture and the secondary influences of other farmers. The sample of 42 farmers included six part-time employees of the Agricultural Research Station at Nungua. Twenty farmers among the sample also owned and/or raised cattle, with herd sizes ranging from 20 to 800 head. A review of the food farming innovations and perceived sources of influences in adoption is presented in Table 33. Data on the cattle industry pg5;§g_have not been analyzed. 131 TABLE 33.--Perceived Major Sources of Influence in Adopting New Agri- cultural Practices by Food Farmers in the Station Study Area, 1969 Use of Use of Use of Im- Use of In- Tractor Ferti- proved Seed secticide/ lizer weedicide Total interviewed 42 42 42 42 Number adopting 4D 23 5 3 Percentages Major Source of Influence: Agricultural Research Station 10a 5 2 0 Ministry of Agriculture 59 38 0 7 Secondary Sources 26 12 10 0 Total Percentage Influenced 95 55 12 7 Percentage Not Influenced 5 45 88 93 Total Percentage 100 100 100 100 aStation employees exclusively. 132 A total of 71 innovations had been adopted by the 42 food farmers. This represented an average of 1.69 adoptions per farmer. Table 33 demonstrates that food farmers were primarily influenced in adoption by the Ministry of Agriculture's extension services. This was parti- cularly true in the case of tractor (59 per cent of sample) and ferti- lizer (38 per cent) innovations. The second major source of influence was other food farmers. An important factor here was the Chief of Katamanso who was both innovative and respected among his fellow farmers. Secondary sources influenced 26 per cent of tractor ad0ptions, 12 per cent of fertilizer adoptions, and ten per cent of improved seed adoptions. The Agricultural Research Station influenced ten per cent, five per cent, two per cent, respectively, primarily among part-time employees of the Station. Though not detailed here, the Station had a relatively greater influence than other sources on the adoption pat- terns of local cattlement. Table 33 also shows that a surprising 95 per cent of the sample had adopted the use of the tractor. This adoption rate is higher than in the previous two case studies and may be attributed to both the relatively long term exposure to tractor operation in the area and the efforts of the extension services to demonstrate the utility of mech- anized farming. The first large-scale mechanized scheme in the study area was the Livestock Farm set up in 1946 by the Ministry of Agricul- ture's Animal Husbandry Division adjacent to what is now the Station (Figure 9).14 However, the more important influence of Ministry of 133 Agriculture began here in 1952 with an extension program directed at local master farmers.15 Ministry tractors were only available on a limited basis at the subsidized rate of 12 shillings ($1.68) per acre. In the early 1960's under Nkrumah tractor totals in Ghana jumped from 140 in 1960 to about 3,800 in 1967.16 Between 1961 and 1967 nearly N¢26 million worth of agricultural machinery was imported. Table 34 shows the value of the machinery by country of origin. Yugoslavia was the major source by Value. Czechoslovakian (Zetor) tractors, however, were the most numerous, totalling 1,400. By 1969, unfortunately, about three-fifths of Ghana's tractors were inoperable.17 Among the sample of farmers 31 per cent used tractors belonging to private owners. This reflected the inability of the extension ser- vices to meet local demand for tractors. There were six private tractor owners in the study area identified during the research. All were hiring out their tractors part-time at rates up to N¢8.00 per acre or about 33 per cent higher than the extension service. This was because the private sector was able to offer greater punctuality and effi- ciency. The impact of the Agricultural Research Station upon local farmers was measured by use of the Impact Index, discussed in Chapter I. Table 35 shows that using Index criteria that 37.9 per cent were posi- tively influenced. Sixty per cent had visited the scheme, 52 per cent had received extension, 50 per cent had observed a demonstration, and 30 per cent had bought Station produce. Three-tenths (30 per cent) 134 TABLE 34.--Countries Exporting Agricultural Machinery into Ghana, 196l- 1967a Country Value Yugoslavia N¢7,045,621 United Kingdom 5,431,805 U.S.A. 4,149,239 Czechoslovakia 3,249,617 West Germany 2,160,152 U.S.S.R. 2,159,218 Other countries 1,693,576 Total N¢25,889,228 aAdapted from Kumar, University of Ghana, op. cit., p. 20, Footnote l6. perceived the scheme as having been the source of influence in the adoption of at least one innovation. Nearly two-thirds (65 per cent) perceived the scheme as beneficial to them. The Station was having greater impact on the sample of farmers than obtained with the State Farm and Brigade Farm area samples. The Impact Index has been subjected to correlation analysis, as in the other case studies, using variables listed in Appendix B. For the 42 farmers in this case notable positive correlation coeffi- cients were found between impact and the Radio Index (.343), use of family labor (.412) and number of farms per farmer (.325). There were no notable negative correlations. The scheme impact hypothesis posits that in the micro-spatial context of the case studies, there would be no "neighborhood effect", 135 TABLE 35.--Impact Index: Agricultural Research Station, Nungua, 1969a Categories Percentages Farmer Experience l. Bought food products from scheme 30 2. Visited scheme at least once 60 3. Observed scheme "demonstration"b 50 4. Received training from schemeC 8 5. Received extension program of schemed 52 6. Been paid employees of scheme in the past 8 Farmer Perception 7. Perceived their innovation adoption as in- fluenced by scheme 30 8. Perceived that they have benefitted from scheme 65 Mean Percentage 37.9 aFarmer sample: N=40 bIncludes passive observation of trial plots, scheme activities, "Open day" (agricultural show), etc. cIncludes any type and length of active training at the schene in agricultural practices, e.g. fertilizer application. dIncludes fertilizer, seeds, plant protectants, advice on parti- cular fann problems, new techniques, credit, etc. 136 that is, no inverse relationship in distance between farmer and scheme. There is an unexpectedly high inverse correlation (-.39l), and, thus, the hypothesis is not supported. Local Food Farmer Characteristics, ’Production and Innovation Let us now take a look at the patterns of personal and house- hold characteristics of local food farmers, the nature and problems of production, and agricultural innovation. 1 Characteristics To test the definition of the so-called "traditional farmer" we are reviewing the characteristics of local food farmers. The domi- nant ethnic group of the study area is the Ga. Different Ga lineages (stools) are established in coastal villages such as Labadi, Teshie, Nungua, Tema and Kpone and over the years local leaders have brought stool lands to the interior under cultivation. Table 37 shows the villages of the study area sample by stool and the population charac- teristics of the villages. The typical farmer in the sample was 49.5 years, had lived in his village for 35.5 years, and had an average of 27.8 years of farming experience. Sixty-four per cent of the farmers owned and lived in their own compounds; 21 per cent lived in houses and 15 per cent lived in single rooms. Seventy-nine per cent of farmer dwellings were con- structed of swish (mud) and 21 per cent were of cement blocks. The typical household was composed of 10.0 persons including the farmer, an average of 1.3 wives and 6.2 living children, of whom 4.9 lived at 137 TABLE 36.--Factor Loadings Defining Traditional Farmer.Third Case Study (N=42) Factor Factor Characteristics 1 2 Traditional Farmer (a) Domestic Characteristics (1) Age 1 .4223 .5350 (2) Years Resident 9 .4973 .4802 (3) Years Farmer 10 .3984 .6129 (4) Household Size 13 .6691 .2086 (5) Number Hives 14 .2682 .3050 (6) Number Children 16 .3253 .4958 (7) Formal Education 51 -.2407 -.5756 (8) Stool Land Tenure 83 -.0386 .4336 (b) Productivity Characteristics (1) Acres Savanna Crops 31 .9430 —.l39l 2) Acres Cassava 32 .8168 .1322 (3) Acres Tomatoes 36 .7778 -.1288 (4) Acres Vegetables 37 .8682 .2374 (c) Innovation 50 .5535 -.5122 138 TABLE 37.--Population Characteristics of the Villages of the Station Study Area Village or Stoola No. Inter- 1960 Pogu- 1948 Popu- Other viewed lation lationb Location 1. Nkwantanang Labadi 2 nd nd 2. Ashaley-Botwe and Maijawc Teshie 9C 215 117 3. Ogbojo Teshie l 84 54 4. Ajiringano Teshie 1 nd nd 5. University Farm (Nungua) 4 211 0 6. Santeo Nungua 3 69 91 7. Katamanso Nungua 8 303 167 8. Ashaiman TEma 4 624 185 9. Mensahkope (Ada) 2 nd nd 10. Zenu Tema 1 39 149 ll. Kubekro and New Kubekro Tema 2 65 174 12. Nshrehum (Stranger) 2 nd nd 13. Apoionia Kpone 2 337 221 14. Bruce's Nursery (Teshie) 1 Total . . 42 aSource: field data. Also refer to Figure 9. Places shown in parentheses are not under Ga Stools' control. Nshrehum is composed of Ada, Ewe, and other "strangers." bSource: Ghana, Census of Population, 1960, I and II, op. cit., Footnote 2, Chapter II. cMaijaw encompassed several widely dispersed Fulani Settlements. Three of the nine interviewed at Ashaley-Botwe and Maijaw were Fulani cattle rearers. 139 home. The average number of school age children (six years and older) in these households was 4.6 of whom 80 per cent had received some for- mal education. The religious affiliation claimed by 52 per cent was Presbyterian, 18 per cent local fetish religions, 12 per cent Apostolic, and Muslim and Methodist 9 per cent each. As elsewhere in the Southern Savanna, sycretism was commonly practiced. Factor analysis has been employed to obtain a definition of the "traditional farmer". Data on domestic, productivity and innovation characteristics of the 42 farmers are analyzed in Table 36 following the process of analysis discussed earlier. The second hypothesis pos- tulated that the traditional farmer can be defined by common domestic characteristics but not necessarily in terms of low productivity or lack of innovation. Factor 1 in Table 36 demonstrates a relatively high degree of communality among domestic characteristics and very strong mea- sures of productivity and innovation. However, Factor 2 follows a rather similar pattern of domestic characteristics though productivity and in- novation scores are quite different. Therefore, one must conclude that the hypothesis is only weakly supported by the data in this case study and the result is inconclusive. Production and Problems The principal crops of the study area are cassava, peppers,18 tomatoes, okro and other vegetables such as garden eggs which were grown primarily by Ga from Teshie and Labadi.19 Though maize was grown by 22 per cent of the farmers, cassava was grown by 90 per cent, preferred 140 because of its superior adaptability to changing patterns of precipi- tation. Table 38 presents data on the savanna food crops and acreages of the study area sample. Fish was a common part of the local diet, usually eaten in combination with a cassava fufu and a variety of vegetable-base soups. Tomatoes were raised by 74 per cent, peppers by 79 per cent, and okro by 64 per cent. Intercropping was practiced by only 17 per cent of the sample. The total acreage of the 42 farmers was 295, a mean of 11.1 acres and a median of 7.0 acres, ranging in size from 1/2 to 132 acres. In addition, sample farmers estimated that they would plant 110 more acres prior to the onset of the major rainy season, primarily in toma- toes and peppers. Calculation of acreages, based on farmer estimates, was simplified because of the common use of the tractor in the study area, charges for which were based on acreage. As is common through Africa, farmers practiced the "bush fallow'l or "land rotation" system of land use in which the farmer changes plots after a year of two of use and lets a part of his land go to fallow to rebuild soil nutrients.20 As elsewhere in the region, a trend noticed was the growing re- liance upon hired labor and mechanization rather than the extended family as a source of labor. Seventy-four per cent of the sample employed hired labor and as mentioned earlier, 95 per cent used tractors. Labor bottle- necks were overcome in cultivation and weeding, in the first instance, and in land preparation, in the second. Child labor was limited and confined largely to non-school periods. However, the traditional pattern of woman-dominated harvesting and marketing functions was not affected 141 TABLE 38.--Crops and Acreages of Forty-Two Food Farmers in the Station Study Area, 1969 Crops No. of Farmers Acres Estimated Acres Growing This Planted to be Planted Cropa --1969b --1969 Cassava 38 (2) 159 0 Maize 9 (0) 25 nd Tomatoes 31 (4) 0 89 Okro 27 (3) 47 1 Peppers 33 (4) 45 15 Garden Eggs 15 (3) 10 5 Othersc 10 (2) 9 nd Totals 42 (7) 295 110 aNumbers in parentheses refer to farmers who interplanted this crop with other crops. bSurvey taken February-April, 1969, before tomatoes, peppers and some other crops had been planted. Numbers are rounded to the nearest whole acre. cIncludes: Calabashes (three farmers), rice (two farmers), onions (two farmers), sweet potatoes (one farmer), yams (one farmer), and flowers (one farmer). 142 by the new labor trends. Few farmer wives were full-time traders, but lnany'sold to forestallers of other "middlemen", which the Ga call gpglgi. I+ired laborers were usually Northerners, generally referred to as the "Hausa". They lived in nearby towns, like Ashaiman and Madina and lwandered from village to village looking for work. Labor was usually distributed on a spatial rather than a temporal basis, at the rate of N¢3.50 to N¢7.00 per acre depending upon difficulty. Arrangements sometimes included meals but seldom were considered steady sources of employment for the hired laborers. Fifty per cent of the sample farmers observed the Ga land taboo on Fridays. Ga and non-Ga observance patterns were similar. In the study area, ethnicity, age and acreage did not seem to be related to resting the land. Observers were only slightly older (53 years) than non-observers (47 years) and both had median acreages of seven. The custom seemed to offer no obstacle to adopting fanning innovations such as tractor utilization. Actually, Sunday was observed as a day of rest by 60 per cent of the sample, for religious, funeral and family reasons not related to observance of the earth fetish. Land tenure patterns were also evolving. Ga land by tradition is held in common under the control of each patriarchal stool.21 The Gbgbg_fetish priest is the landlord, located in the lineage homes such as Teshie or Nungua, who may distribute land himself or delegate this duty to chiefs in interior villages. Seventy-nine per cent of the sample were Ga, and in every instance they were farming stool land with chief or priest permission. The 21 per cent non-Ga were all renting 143 land from the Ga, though the fees were minimal or non-existent. Unlike the other case study areas, no sample farmer held allodial rights and none had purchased or sold land. Major sources of capital among the 42 food farmers were sale of crops (31 per cent), personal or market loans (29 per cent), and sale of animals (26 per cent). Table 39 displays the major sources of capital, differentiated as raisers and non-raisers of cattle. Food farmers who raised cattle found the sale of animals to be the first major income source (55 per cent) and sale of crops second (30 per cent). Those without cattle depended upon personal and market loans (45 per cent) and sale of crops (32 per cent). Five of six part-time employees of the Agri- cultural Station found wage income most important. The major problems among farmers were inadequate credit, irregular rainfall and water supply, animal diseases and drug scarcity, and tractor scarcity. An inventory of the perceived problems of the sample is pre- sented in Table 40. The patterns of problems were similar for food farmers with and without cattle. However, tractor scarcity was rather more important for the latter group. The leading first-mentioned problems were animal diseases/drug scarcity and lack of credit. Innovation Among the sample the average number of innovations was 1.69. Seventy—one innovations had been adopted by 41 farmers. Only one farmer had not adopted an innovation. In the following tables innovation has been compared with indices of travel experience (Table 41), radio accessi- bility (Table 42), extension service contact (Table 43), and formal education (Table 44). 144 TABLE 39.--Major Sources of Capital for Agriculturalists in the Station Study Area, 1969 Major Source Food Farmers Food Farmers Total of Capital Without Cattle Owning Cattle No. % No. % No. % Sale of Crops 7 32 6 30 13 31 Sale of Animals . . . . ll 55 ll 26 Personal or market loans 10 45 2 10 12 29 Bank Loans 0 O l 5 1 2 Wage income 5 23 0 O 5 12 Total 22 100 20 100 42 100 TABLE 40.--Inventory of Perceived Problems of Farmers, with and without Cattle, in the Station Study Area, 1969a Problem Food Food Totals Farmers Farmers Without Owning Cattle Cattle l. Credit/money l3 (5) ll (4) 24 (9) 2. Rainfall irregularity/ dams/water supply 11 (l) 9 (l) 20 (2) 3. Animal diseases/drug scarcity 2 (0) 15 (10) 17 (10) 4. Tractor scarcity 8 3) 4 (2) 12 (5) 5. Transportation/roads 4 l) 2 (2) 6 (3) 6. White ants/rodents/ insects 4 (2) 2 (0) 6 (2) 7. Fertilizer scarcity 2 (O) l (0) 3 (O) 8. Othersb 5 (0) 5 (0) 10 (0) aNumbers in parentheses represent the number of people who said that this was their most serious problem. One or more answers were possible for each interviewee. bInadequate training/knowledge of agriculture (two farmers), irrigation (two farmers), seeds unavailable (one farmer), thieves (one farmer), land moving (one farmer), encroachment of farms on cattle grazing areas (one farmer), poor extension (one farmer), and poor markets (one farmer). 145 TABLE 4l.—-Travel Experience and Adoption of Innovations Among Station Study Area Food Farmers, 1969a Travel Number of Inno- Farmer Innovation Experiencea vations Adopted Totals Index 0 1 2 3 4 No. % 1 (most experienced) O 3 2 0 3 8 19 2.38 2 0 l 0 l 0 2 5 2.00 3 0 l O 0 0 l 3 1.00 4 0 3 3 l O 7 17 1.72 5 0 7 8 0 O 15 36 1.53 6 0 2 4 0 O 6 14 1.67 7 (least experienced) 1 2 O 0 0 3 6 0.67 Total Food Farmers 1 l9 l7 2 3 42 100 1.69 al=travel to another region, Kumasi, Takoradi, Tamale, many other areas of Ghana and abroad; 2=to another region, Kumasi, Takoradi, Tamale and many other areas of Ghana; 3=to another region, Kumasi, Takoradi, and some other areas of Ghana; 4=to another region, Kumasi, and some other local places; 5=to another region and a few other local places; 6=only traveled in this region; and 7=very limited travel. TABLE 42.--Radio Accessibility and Adoption of Innovations Among Station Study Area Food Farmers, l969 Status Number of Inno- Farmer Innovation vations Adopted Totals Index 0 l 2 3 4 No. % Have radio 1 13 10 l 3 28 67 1.71 Have access 0 2 5 l O 8 19 1.87 Have no radio and no access 0 4 2 0 O 6 14 1.33 Total Food Farmers 1 19 17 2 3 42 100 1.69 146 TABLE 43.--Extension Services Contact and Adoption of Innovations Among Station Study Area Food Farmers, 1969 Extension Service Number of Inno- Farmer Innovation Contact vations Adopted Totals Index 0 l 2 3 4 No. Contact l 13 12 2 3 31 74 1.77 No contact 0 6 5 0 0 ll 26 1.45 Total Food Farmers 1 l9 l7 2 3 42 100 1.96 TABLE 44.--Forma1 Education and Adoption Study Area Food Farmers, 1969 of Innovations Among Station Formal Education Number of Inno- Farmer Innovation Attempted vations Adopted Totals Index 0 1 2 3 4 No. % None 1 12 12 2 l 28 67 1.64 Primary 0 3 O 0 0 3 7 1.00 Middle 0 3 4 0 O 7 17 1.57 Advancedb o l l o 2 4 9 2.75 Total Food Farmers 1 19 17 2 3 42 100 1.69 147 The third hypothesis states that innovation among farmers is directly related to measures of farmer productivity, susceptability to scheme impact, and extension service contact, travel experience, and access to radios. There are direct correlations between all of these variables and innovation, and are notably higher in the instances of productivity (.493) and travel (.416). However, the other coefficients are rather weak, and it must therefore be concluded that the data are inconclusive and inadequately support the innovative farmer hypothesis. The fourth hypothesis assumes that formal education is not related to agricultural productivity or innovation. The formal educa- tion hypothesis is supported by the case study data. The Education Index shows no notable correlation with productivity (-.115) and only a weak direct relationship (.189) with innovation. Summar The third case study has focussed on the Nungua Agricultural Research Station of the University of Ghana. It was set up in 1952 both to investigate the problems of Southern Savanna agricultural devel- opment and to train Ghanaian agricultural science students. Extension work was also initiated by the Station both in the areas of crop and animal production. Numerous research projects have been undertaken by the Farm with special success coming in breeding and adaptation of imported livestock and local breeds for increased meat and milk pro— duction. In 1969 budgetary structures were unfortunately reducing the research output and effectiveness of the Station. 148 The impact of the Station on local fOOd farmers was not as great as among local cattlemen. However, the Impact Index was 37.9 per cent. Greater influence in food farming came from the Ministry of Agriculture and secondary adopters among other farmers. The factor analysis of farmer domestic characteristics was not able to provide an adequately clear definition of the "traditional farmer."'The typical farmer was found to grow cassava and vegetables primarily, on a median of 7.0 acres. A surprising 95 per cent of the sample used tractors and 74 percent used hired labor to break labor bottlenecks at land prepara- tion and weeding periods, respectively. The land tenure was fairly stable with no sample farmer holding allodial rights. A land taboo was observed by 50 per cent of the sample. Major sources of capital were sale of crops (31 per cent), especially for farmers who were not raising cattle as well, and sale of animals (26 per cent) for those with animals. Major problems were perceived as inadequate credit, irregular water supplyoanimal problems, and tractor scarcity. Only the education hypothesis is adequately supported by the data; the traditional farmer and innovative farmer hypotheses are weakly supported; and the scheme impact hypothesis is not supported by this case study. FO0TNOTES--CHAPTER V 1Other University Agricultural Research Stations were set up at Kpoing (1954) and Kade (1959) to study irrigated farming and forest agriculture, respectively. Much information on the history of the Nungua Station was collected from AgriculturalResearch Station file notes written by A.S.B. Wilson, a former Farm Manager. 2See Peter Hill, et. al., Guide to the Agricultural Research Station, Nungua (University College of’the G01d‘Coast, Faculty of Agriculture: 1955). 3Files of the Agricultural Research Station, Nungua, c. 1954, File 57, p. 77. 4Wilson, op. cit., Footnote 1. 5Peter Hill was the first Station Manager (1952-1960). He was the son-in-law of John Phillips, the head of the new Faculty of Agri- culture in 1952. Both were men with considerable experience in live- stock-rearing in South Africa. 5See J. L. Steward and M. o. w. Jefferys, The Cattle of the Gold Coast (Accra: Government Printer, 1956); P. M1 Ahn,_“WaterRe- sources in the Ashaiman-Dodowa Area of the Accra Plains, South-East Ghana," (Faculty of Agriculture, Legon, January, 1965). (Mimeographed); Valuable contributions have been made by E. O. Otchere, "Preliminary Observations on Milk Production Among the Fulani on the Accra Plains," (unpublished B.S. dissertation, Faculty of Agriculture, Legon, 1966). Later, similar ground was covered by Charles Kojo Graham, "A Report on the Cattle Industry Around Nungua," (Legon: 1968), which won the Shell Prize for Agriculture in 1968; and E. K. Tetteh, "Commercial Cattle Raising on the Accra Plains“ (unpublished B.A. dissertation, Department of Geography, Legon, 1968); Polly Hill, "A Socio-Economic Report on Cattle Ownership and Fulani Herdsmen in the Ashaimen/Dodowa District of the Accra Plains" (Institute of African Studies, Legon, October, 1964). (Mimeographed); also incorporated in Polly Hill, Studies in Rural Capita- lism in West Africa (Ibadan: C. U. P., 1970). 7R. Rose Innes, "Grasslands, Pastures and Fodder Production," Agriculture and Land Use in Ghana, Brian Wills (ed.) (London: Oxford University Press,l§62), Chapter 23; and University of Ghana, Agri- cultural Research Station (Nungua), 1967 Annual Report (Legon: 1968), p. 70. 149 150 8University of Ghana, ibid., p. 74; and interviews with several Station personnel, April-May, 1969. 9An agreement was signed in 1961 by John Phillips, Dean of the Faculty of Agriculture and Nii Odai Ayiky III for the acquisition of 670 acres (increased later after cadastral survey to748 acres) for £502.10.0 (about $1,400). 10In 1969, former Farm Manager, Mr. Quarty-Papafio, was put in charge. Plans were designed to achieve full production by 1972 with 200 steers, 525 lambs, 2,100 goats, plus annual production of 8,100 eggs, 4,500 boilers, and 26,400 broilers. At the time of writing a loan of N¢250,000 was under consideration at the Agricultural Develop- ment Bank, Proposal--Nungua Commercial Unit, pp. 1-3, and Agricultural Development Bank Interview, may, 1969. 1‘Interview with Dr. F. Vohradsky, Senior Research Officer, Agricultural Research Station, Nungua, 18 February, 1969. Specific figures were not available at the time of writing. 12Major tick sprays used were Gammotox and Cupitox which were available from retail establishments in Accra such as the Ghana National Trading Company, Ltd. (G.N.T.C.). 13Ahn, op. cit., p. 15, Footnote 6. 14Interviews with E. T. Ablakwa, former Farm Manager, and P. M. Adansi, Farm Manager, Animal Husbandry Division (Livestock Farm), 24 April, 1969. 15Interview with Chief Seth Laryes Afotey Agbo, Katamanso, 20 February, 1969. The chief was one of the first to adopt government advice on crop and animal production in the study area. He was pround of this "first" and had the original letter from the Ministry inviting him to participate in the extension program. 16Hans Kumar, "Agricultural Machinery Inventory," University of Ghana, Faculty of Agriculture, Report of the Symposium on Farm Mechani- zation, Legon, 7th and 8th January, 1969 (Accra: council for’Scientific and Industrial Research, 1969), p. 15. 17F. M. Akuffo estimated that because of lack of standardization and scarcity of spare parts 60 per cent of the vehicles transferred to his division (Mechanization and Transport) by the United Ghana Farmers' Council Cooperatives in 1967 were inoperable: F. M. Akuffo, "Utilizing and Maintaining Present Equipment," University of Ghana, op. cit., p. 66, Footnote l6. 151 18Peppers are of four types: (1) the round red k on -k 0, meaning "ground-up," which sold in 1969 at four for l NP; (2) tEe E aE 0, small and also round and sold for 2 NP to 10 NP per cigarette tin; (3) the o'en k a meaning "smells sweet" and sold for four for 3 NP; (4) and the popuiar long red Akwele-Wabi meaning "the finger of a girl named Akwele" which sold at 80 to 100 NP per burlap bagful. 19For discussions of the agriculture of the area see "Teshie Settlements of Accra Plains," Ni erian Geographical Journal, IX, No. l (1966), pp. 45-53; and F. G. A5|orh, "Land’Use of Teshie and its Villages" (unpublished B.A. dissertation, Department of Geography, Legon, 1969). 20These terms are preferred to "shifting cultivation" which im- plies a movement of people and their domiciles or villages rather than the more common practice of farming ifferent plots of land from year to year without moving one's home. See Brammer, 1965, o . cit., p. 22, Footnote 1, Chapter II; and discussions of the "bush-faliow system” in Ester Boserup, op. cit., Footnote 14, Chapter I; and P. H. Nye and D. J. Greenland, op. cit., Footnote 30, Chapter II. 2‘See Pogucki, op. cit., Footnote 45, Chapter II. CHAPTER VI THE FOURTH CASE STUDY: LOCAL FOOD FARMERS AND THE ADA COOPERATIVE The fourth case study is concerned with the local food farmers in the area centering on the Ada Cooperative Food Farmers Union, Ltd. The study area is located about 50 miles east of Accra in the south- eastern-most part of the Accra Plains. It is wedged between the Gulf of Guinea and the Volta River estuary (Figure 11). The Ada Coopera- tive has acquired farm land north of the Songaw Lagoon. Its membership is made up of local farmers who are relatively poor and dependent upon the growing of food crops for their major source of income. The Ada Adangbe are the dominant ethnic group. The objectives of this study, as with earlier ones, are: (a) to review the background and development of the Ada Cooperative scheme, (b) to examine its impact on local farmers in the context of other influences, and (c) to look at the characteristics of these farmers in terms of agricultural innovation and production. Eighty-two per cent of the sample were members of the scheme. The data will be used to test the hypotheses presented in the introductory chapter. Background and Development of the Scheme The Ada Cooperative Food Farmers Union, Ltd. was established in 1966. A series of cooperatives had preceded the Ada Cooperative during 152 153 pp mmamHm .2. .o . :35 FEELS. too... 000 oo< B 22.64 . .o .oto< 5.52 . 90.03.32: Fletch 3 909.52 . xgcaom 3:55 .. foucaom _uco_oo¢ I .. l I nEo!w . . .. ll xouck ..o fumif ll- COOK . . . . " 002:) 02330000. . ozmwa ’ a x g,” Z / / z.\\ / ' g.m\ e \ .carfisefiai; i 095 mZFdQMQOOU <04. wI._. . .33 .85 ’2... 5:0... 154 the early 1960's. With the increasing commercial character of food farming in the area, food production and marketing were subject to greater indigenous organization. Major food products were a partially processed cassava dough, tomatoes and other vegetables. Background The cooperative has been prescribed as a remedy for the economic ills of small acreage farmers in Ghana for many years.1 The movement was institutionalized in the colonial period with the creation of the Department of Cooperatives in April, 1944.2 During the late 1940's and through the 1950's the Department was successful in organizing the marketing function of cocoa farmers.3 Much less attention was shown to production, especially of food crops. Supervision and control of the cooperative movement remained the primary functions of the Department until 1958, when two auditing unions were created to partially decen- tralize accounting. To devolve responsibility further, between 1958 and 1960 three apex organizations, the Alliance of Ghana Cooperatives, the Ghana Cooperative Marketing Association, Ltd. and the Ghana Coopera- tive Bank, Ltd., were assigned government-appointed directors. In June, 1961, the Department of Cooperatives was abolished by the Nkrumah government. Its responsibilities were taken up by the United Ghana Farmers' Council Cooperatives. It had exclusive cocoa buying rights from the State Cocoa Marketing Board and supervised other produce marketing societies. It also served as a political mechanism of government in rural areas under Nkrumah. The scale of operations 155 grew rapidly during the early 1960's. By 1965 acreage of cooperatives (18,413) was second only to that of State Farms (63,812) among large- scale agricultural schemes in Ghana.4 In the year preceding Nkrumah's fall the Ministry of Cooperatives was created to centralize organization of the disparate rural influences of the United Ghana Farmers' Council Cooperatives. The cooperative movement felllmrtof favor among many farmers. After the coup in 1966 the Department of Cooperatives was rein- stated. It set about to resolve the loss of confidence in the coopera- tive movement among peasant farmers and workers. New rules and regula- tions for societies were laid down and the Agricultural Development Bank came into being in 1967 to increase rural credit.5 A "Cooperative Societies Decree" was issued by the National Liberation Council in 1968 to strengthen the auditing, inspection and enquiry functions of the Registrar and Department of Cooperatives.6 In 1967 there were 2,137 registered cooperative societies.7 Only seven per cent (147) of these were produce marketing societies for food crops. Most (1,047) were devoted to cocoa marketing. Other functions served by cooperatives were the distilling of local gin called akpeteshi, fish marketing, small industrial production (such as weaving, mat making, baking, and handicrafts), thrift and loan organization, transportation and livestock production. There were also 41 cooperative unions and six apex organizations. Few societies in Ghana have actually been the indigenously- generated, grass-roots organizations usually associated with the 156 cooperative movement. Most have been developed externally by govern- ment as vehicles for overcoming economic impotency in rural farming areas. Cooperatives have been seen by Government as means of linking rural and urban development and of quelling the frustrations of the poor. At the time of writing, despite a tattered history of failure among coopera- tives in Ghana, enthusiasm remained high among decision-makers for coop- eratives as mechanisms of change. It is perhaps not surprising that few cooperatives in Ghana have come into being through local initiative. Peasant farmers hesitate to compound the insecurity of the agricultural environment with the further risks inherent in intrusting one's produce and profits to cooperative leaders. This is probably because of (a) the organizational structure of cooperative in Ghana, and (b) differential levels of education. Cooperative leadership consists of the President, Vice President, Treasurer and Secretary, who are often of the same ethnic background. The Secretary is usually the most powerful of these. He represents the society to government and is the only leader who must be literate in English to perform his role in the cooperative.8 There are frequent cleavages between the educated leadership and the illiterate membership. In joining a cooperative the farmer lays his trust of the leadership and fellow membership on the line. In these circumstances trust can often be translated as common ethnicity which provides bonds of culture, language and morality. Even within an ethnic group the uneducated are often suspicious of the educated, for education loosens ethnic bonds. The leadership and particularly the Secretary must be clever to bridge the gap of distrust. This problem might not 157 only be an explanation of the lack of indigenously-initiated coopera- tives, but also an element in the frequent failure of those organiza- tions which do come into being. Development of the Ada Cooperative The Ada Cooperative Food Farmers' Union, Ltd. is an example of a cooperative based on local initiative. In 1969 it was the only significant agricultural development scheme of the Ada people. It was considered the single viable cooperative in the Accra Plains.9 As such it was not typical of cooperatives in Ghana. It consisted of 12 food crop marketing societies including eight which were registered (Adokope, Huakpo, Koloidaw, Nawhalenya, Alihakposisi, Nantsekope, Sege Junction and Sege Koni) and four which were unregistered (Bonikope associated with Sege Junction, Toflokpo-Hanya with Koloidaw, Asigbekope and Afiadenyigba with Nawhalenya) (Figure 11). The first Cooperative of the Ada pe0ple was created in late 1961 in association with Nkrumah's United Ghana Farmers' Council Cooperatives. It folded in 1964 for lack of adequate planting materials and equipment. A second Ada Cooperative with a membership of 45 was formed in 1965 by the United Ghana Farmers Council Cooperatives but failed for similar reasons as the first. The rise of the third Ada Cooperative Food Farmers' Union, Ltd., in 1966 quickened the demise of its predecessor. It was formed by a dissident element of 30 farmers who did not trust the Council Cooperatives and had, up to that time, been skeptical about cooperatives in general. However, strong leadership in the person of A. O. Zogblah, an Ada who became its Secretary, had much to do with the genesis of the new union. 158 The Secretary had had 15 years experience with the Ministry of Agriculture and in 1965 completed a diploma in c00perative develop- ment in the infamous Kwame Nkrumah Ideological Institute at Winneba. Just before the coup he was offered the position of District Organizer of Cooperatives for Ada and Adangbe-Shai-Osudoku Districts. When fate nullified this role, Mr. Zogblah was encouraged by the Federation of Food Farmers' Cooperatives in Accra to organize Ada Farmers on his own initiative.10 In 1966 Mr. Zogblah visited villages surrounding Ada and success- fully encouraged membership in cooperatives. Some cropping was even undertaken that year. The Ada Cooperative obtained leases on Adibiawe land in the Medovunu-Wuonyi area and Lomobiawe land in the Lota area, through the heads of the respective Ada lineages in Big Ada (Figure 11). In 1967 the 12 societies noted above formed the Union, each paying N¢100. Some 3,600 acres were bought under production and yielded 11,000 tons of cassava, 275 tons of tomatoes, 2,000 bags of peppers, 1,250 bags of groundnuts and some other vegetables. The office of the Ada Cooperative was located in Ada Foah, the largest market town of the area, to establish links with market women, particularly for the sale of cassava dough. The major cash crop, tomatoes, was sold to (a) market women, (b) the State Cannaries Cor- poration at Nsawam, 20 miles north of Accra, and (c) Economic Industries of the indigenous Baah Industrial Group, located 25 miles west of Accra.]] Unfortunately, 1968 proved to be a year of excessively heavy rains and most tomatoe production was severely affected. 159 A loan request (originally pegged at N¢lO0,000) was submitted by the Ada Cooperative to the Agricultural Development Bank in 1968 for mechanized equipment, fuel and maintenance and other assistance. In February, 1969 the application was approved and a loan of N¢40,000, at eight per cent interest for five years, was made for tractors, ac- cessories and other equipment, fuel and maintenance.12 The loan stimu- lated increased membership which rose to 247 in 1969. Members paid N¢3.00 to join a society and contributed N¢l0.00 share capital per year. These funds were used to capitalize operations. Equipment was purchased and a monthly servicing contract was written with Massey-Ferguson.13 A mechanization officer was employed, tractor drivers were trained and rates and schedules of utilization were drawn up.14 The focus of Ada Cooperative shifted from Ada Foah to Koloidaw, the scheme center, in early 1969 (Figure 11). A new tractor shed with adjoining office was constructed there to protect equipment and to provide a venue for weekly meetings of the Committee. As with other cooperatives in Ghana, the Committee was the governing body of the Ada Cooperative. In Ada it consisted of the President-Chairman, Vice-President, Treasurer, Assistant Treasurer plus three other members, each representing different societies in the Union. Representatives of each of the other societies were co-opted as non- voting members to assure participation by all 12 societies. The Com- mittee officially appointed the Secretary, who acted as a non-member recorder and link with government. Regular Thursday meetings were held to discuss operations, targets, and establish common rules, regulations and understandings among‘members.15 160 Ambitious production targets were set for the 1969 major growing season. The "official" l969 goal of 8,106 acres is shown by crop and society in Table 45. Major crops are cassava, tomatoes, groundnuts, peppers, okro, onions and bambarra beans. However, these targets were inflated for strategic discussions with the Agricultural Development Bank. In the Secretary's own candid view 5,000 acres was considered more representative of a one-year maximum target. Among 26 cooperative members interviewed there was a projected 11.1 acres to be planted (median 10.0), or roughly a third of the "official" per-farmer target acreages. This would produce in linear progression a total of about 2,742 acres rather than the "official" figure of 8,106. These were to be planted in addition to personal fann acreages, averaging 11.0 acres (mean) among 41 members sampled. Even a scheme target of 2,742 acres compares favorably with those noted in previous case studies. This did not seem a wholly unrealistic goal in view of the fact that 3,600 acres were planted during the 1967 season. A long-range objective of the Ada Cooperative was to establish settlements on cooperative lands in the interior. In 1969 that was impossible because of the lack of adequate domestic water supply and irrigation facilities on the new farming sites. However, the land was under cultivation, with particular effort being given to the develop- ment of the area surrounding Medovunu-Wuonyi. The problems facing the Union, to be discussed in the following sections, resembled those facing peasant agriculture everywhere in the Southern Savanna. Scarce water supply, endemic plant diseases, insect ‘161 .momp .mngoume m>wuaemaoou mu< "ougaomm map mmm mpn Pem “mu mm¢.~ Pom.~ mo_.m m.mm new mpmpoh m __ mp mm em FQF m__ com m.- FF mnochom NP e, mm mm em N~_ ¢__ wen N.m~ m. mnoxou< u mp mm mm mm cop ewp Nmm F.5N mp m»=m_m;zmz o m_ mm mm mm mp_ cmp «mm m.- m— onm_»cmum_m< on me mm we no amp mmp mmm m.m~ mp maoxmmucm: m— Pm mm me em cum ~e~ mom m.m~ Pm cages: m cm cu mm mm oep «Fm up“ “.mm om Pcog mmmm mp om amp om mm mu, —- mmn m.oe mp wmwmonxonwp< m mm mm mm mm mmu mmm was o.~m em cop» -ucao ommm em Ne we Pm me new «mm mmm ~.~m mm oxen: -oaxopmoh om mm cm mm cop mom mum ooo.~ m.Pm mm 3ovpopox mm em “a mop em. NNm new «mm._ m.me mm oeoxoemen< magma meow os memo mus: moo» m>mm mggmasmm ico -xo imam luczoco -meop -mmu man man -meu< -mcu< msmnsmz xpmwuom Ammsu< cwv maosu pouch cum: mo .02 m>wpmgwqoou mmmmp .nosu new xpm_uom am ..nu4 .cowcn .memeLmd wood m>_umsmaoou mn< we“ Low mummcm» omemcuwuncmaoou mnwucw mgu eo mmmx_mco mwmmcpogxc Lopznmba .mwmmspoaxz musoaaam xpxmmz »_:o co m>wmapocoucw we want u xmmz mumueoaaam no: mwmmcuoaxc u oz mumusoaqsm mwmmguoqx; u mm» "mmmconmwm op amxa mm» mm» mm» mm» mm» cowpmuzuu ~mgsom .8 mm» mm» xmmz gem: 3mm: coated m>_pe>o:=H .m mm» max xmmz mm» mm» Lessee pmcowpwumeh .N mm» mm» o: o: Jam: pomasH memgum .P name n 2v aANm_ n zv afiom n 23 eoeeaom aflom " 2v mmmmu m>wpocmaoou :uemwmmm mummmcm nfiom u zv __< ee< _ae=opao_em< .neoxeoz seed oeeem >H . HHH HH H mwmpou xvaum mmmu Amppwu pgocmv wan umpeoaazm memmcuoaaz mwmmzuoqzx seeem omeu so oeoeesm memoeeoQAI--.Nm msmoee_ on mos ~_mN. ammo. em mopeaeoao> moeo< Aev mm» o__o.i mesm. mm mmoumsoh mmeu< Amy mm» mmoo. ommu. mm e>mmmmo mmcu< ANW mm» “mum. «mom. pm mnoeu ccco>mm mmcu< AF muwumwcmuumgmnu see>_oo=eoee Any no» ommm.- oopm. mm oeacoe eceA _oopm Amy we» mnmm. Pmpm.i Fm :owumuzum Passed Amy was mm_o.- Nmmm. e_ eoce__eu consaz Amy no» mmmo.- meme. e. nose: consez Amy was mneo.- memm. mp o~_m epoeoneoz Lev was Nkmo.- “Rem. o_ coated memo» “m3 mm» Nnmo.i omem. m acmvwmmm memm> ANV no» Kmho. oeom. _ om< Apv mupummgmpumcmgu uwpmmsoa Amy was tossed .aeoeoeeaee .N FF oocapmwo Pe_peem-oeoez mm» .. .. amp. new mm Axmccu uumaemv cowamg -Puwpcmaicowaawugmm any we» weaned esoeom .. mumm mummnam N _ mwpnmpcm> Louumd gouge; new mcmpcoaqam mALV cow“ goaszz Amppw» ugozmv mvmmcpoa»: mwmxpec< Louumm -mpmscoo mpnmwse> mommsuoaa: A~m_ a 2v momma __< men»_ee< nemoeeoesz caeeaee--.mm w3m__mseoc mg on emumsumcoEme coon no: m>ms mane mmmchm om cowaw>occH mo» .. ii NFO.- ecu _m xoeee eoeoeoeem any Pm xuw>wuusuocm mm» 1. .. mm_.- new Fm xmncH cowumuaem Aev mm» cowumuzum popcod .e mu owema mm» ii ii mom. new om copum>occm Amy ms Pm>mch mm» .. .. mNN. one om eoeoesoeee Aev Pm pumucou cowmcmpxm mm» i- ii mmm. ucm om :owum>occH Auv mm eoeeefi mm» in it eee. ucm om copum>o=cu any Fm zuw>wuo=eoga mm» ii i- mum. new om :o_ue>occH Amy mm» gassed m>eum>occm .m mpmm mummnam N P souumm Logged mm—mmwee> wemueoaaam eflcv cow» sonsaz Am_uwp acozmv mwmmzpoaxx mwmxpmc< Logos; -mecsou o_nmwcm> mummguoax: 190 .xoe=H eoeeed n zHeueezH eea mxmecH oweom n zHoHomch u 2H4m>occmv emanate meowuo>occw mo conga: u up<>ozzH “maoeu ecce>mm c_ umuce_a moomeum Pmpou u mwozzH m ooo._ NNN. cup. wep. omm. mw Amm_ n zv mo_eaeea> sex eoe toe xecoez cowpe_oecou o_eeem .mm memee 191 (1) Number of innovations (INNOVATE) (2) Persons per household (PERSHOUS) (3) Farmer age (AGE) This means that the farmers most influenced by the scheme were those who were most innovative, had relatively larger households and were of re- latively more advanced age. This observation was supported by empirical evidence in each of the four case studies. However, the fact that 76 per cent of the variance was not explained by the three variables means that much of the impact of schemes was dependent upon variables outside the purview of this study. The results constitute only a partial ex- planation and should be interpreted with caution. The Traditional Farmer A comnon view in developing countries is that the so-called tra- ditional, small-acreage farmer is the principal operative in any pro- gram of agricultural growth. Yet, paradoxically, he is at once seen as conservative, subsistence-oriented, unproductive, unchanging or even unchangeable. In this thesis an effort has been made to get at a functional definition of such a farmer. The hypothesis is posited that the traditional farmer cannot be defined only on the basis of domestic characteristics (age, household size, education, etc.), since productivity and levels of innovation may be significant among food farmers. Factor analysis has been employed to obtain a definition of the traditional farmer. Data on the domestic, productivity and innovation characteristics of the 50 farmers are analyzed in Table 58. If the hypothesis is correct factor analysis should reveal (a) a grouping 192 together in a common factor of high factor scores for domestic charac- teristics, and (b) a grouping together in the same factor of high factor scores for characteristics of productivity and innovation. Table 58 shows that Factor 1, the factor with the greatest preportion of total variance, meets the above-stated conditions. _- 4» 4-‘2 , 0n the basis of these data the traditional farmer is one who may be defined as of advanced age, who has a large household, consisting of many wives and children, and many years of farming experience and residence in a given locale, and one who enjoys the advantages of the ij land tenure of his lineage. However, he is not necessarily unproductive nor innovative. In the Southern Savanna it has been observed that the traditional fanmer, so defined, was indeed, productive and innovative. The Innovative Farmer Farmer innovativeness was measured by use of the Innovation Index, i.e. simply the mean innovations per farmer. Innovations sur- veyed were adaption of the use of the tractor, fertilizer, improved seeds or seedlings, and weedicides/insecticides. Among the sample of 192 farmers innovations adapted totaled 252, an average of 1.31 innova— tions per farmer. The third hypothesis postulates that innovation among farmers is directly related to measures of farmer productivity, susceptability to scheme impact, and extension service contact, travel experience and radio access. The hypothesis is substantially supported by the data presented in Table 58. There is a positive, direct correlation between 193 innovation and each of the five variables. Coefficients for impact (r = .444) and productivity (r = .377) are the strongest. In the following tables innovation has been compared with indices of travel (Table 60), radio accessibility (Table 61), and extension service contact (Table 62). The most innovative farmer tended to have more travel experience, greater access to radio communication and a higher rate of extension service contact. Chi-squared tests show that the variances cannot be explained by chance (p = <0.0l). To explain the variance in innovation a multiple regression was run using the Innovation Index as the dependent variable with nine other selected key variables, presented in the simple correla— tion matrix in Table 59. Only 33 per cent of the total variance (r2 = 0.3324) was explained by the following four independent variables: (1) Farmer acreage (ACREAGE) (2) Scheme impact (IMPACTIN) (3) Travel experience (TRAVELIN) (4) Radio access (RADIOIN) The most innovative farmer was one with the greatest number of acres planted, experienced the greatest scheme impact, and had the most travel experience and accessibility to radio communication. However, the fact that 67 per cent of the variance was not explained by these four variables means that much of the innovation of farmers was dependent upon variables outside the purview of this study. Thus, the regression results offer only a partial explanation and must be interpreted cautiously. Formal Education The fourth hypothesis states that formal education is not related to agricultural productivity or innovation. Table 58 demonstrates that 194 TABLE 60.--Trave1 Index Travel Percen- N Number of Innovation Index tages Innovations Index3 1 (most experienced) 8 15 31 2.07 2 9 18 30 1.67 3 15 28 42 1.50 4 23 44 53 . 1.20 5 36 69 82 1.19 6 8 15 12 0.80 7 (least experienced) l 3 2 0.67 Average Totals 100 192 252 1.31 ax=107, df = 6, p =< 0.001. TABLE 6l.--Radio Index Status Percen- N Number of Innovation tages Innovations Indexa Have radio 40 76 121 1.59 Have access 33 63 74 1.17 Have no radio and no access 27 53 57 1.08 Averages 1.31 Totals 100 192 252 ax=11. df = 2. p =<0.0l 195 TABLE 62.--Extension Service Contact and Innovation Extension Service Percen- N Number of Innovation Contact tages Innovations Indexa Contact 64 122 193 1.58 No contact 36 7O 59 0.84 FTI Average 1.31 Totals 100 192 252 ax = 23, df =1, p = <0.001 1,} the formal education hypothesis as supported by the data for 192 food farmers. The Education Index, based on the number of years of formal education, shows no correlation with innovation (r = -.012) or productivity (r = -.125). Table 59 shows some interesting though not expected relation- ships with other variables. Formal educatiun is positively correlated with travel experience (r = .328) and radio accessibility (r = .288) and negatively correlated with age (r =-.352), household head occupance responsibility (r = -.208) and persons per household (r = -.208). Table 63 shows that the most innovative farmers were those without any formal education. The table indicates that there is little variance in innovation among the categories of fonnal education, when those farmers with Specialized agricultural training are excluded from the sample. Farmers with specialized training in agriculture unsur- prisingly are most innovative. On the basis of this evidence it would 196 TABLE 63.--Education Index Formal Education Percen- N Number of Innovation Begun tages Innovations Index None 61 118 164 1.39 Primary 9 17 12 0.71 Middle 23 45 53 1.18 Advanced: non-agricultural 3 5 5 1.00 Subtotal 96 185 234 1.26 Advanced: agriculturala 4 7 18 2.57 Total 100 192 252 1.31 aCompleted post-high school agricultural training at the Agri- cultural College, Kwadaso, Kumasi. appear that formal education is not a necessary condition for agricultural innovation or production. Spatial Variations This section of our comparative analysis is concerned with the spatial variations of the data from case to case. Variations in scheme impact and farmer characteristics and innovation will be studied in the following subsections. Differential Scheme Impact Considerable variation in scheme impact was observed from case to case. The Ada Cooperative and the Agricultural Research Station 197 had the greatest impact on Farmers, with Impact Indices of 55.9 per cent and 37.9 per cent, respectively (Table 64). The influence of these indigenous Ghanaian schemes was significantly greater (p = 0.001) than the Impact Indices of 10.4 per cent and 14.5 per cent for the Workers' Brigade and State Farm schemes, respectively. In the former cases there were greater efforts to extend the influence of the schemes. For the Research Station, extension was an integral part of the work in animal husbandry. In the case of the Ada Cooperative, the exten- sion services of the Ministry of Agriculture used the scheme as a vehicle for its work in the Ada area. In fact, Cooperative members were the primary recipients of extension services among food farmers around Ada. In contrast, the State Farm and Workers' Brigade lacked effec- tive relationships with the extension services in their areas. These two schemes operated largely independently of surrounding farmers, were seldom visited by local farmers and only infrequently marketed produce locally. When viewed in the context of other change agents the schemes were generally less influential than the extension services and secondary farmer sources. Table 65 demonstrates this. Though 33 per cent of the farmers were influenced in innovation adoption, only six per cent per- ceived the scheme as the major source of influence in this process. The Ministry of Agriculture's extension services were the most significant change agents in three of the case studies. The exception was the Ada Cooperative case in which the COOperative was the most 198 TABLE 64.--Comparative Impact Index Scheme Farmer Impact N Indexa Percentage l. Afife-Weta State Fann 40 14.5 2. Somanya Workers' Brigade Farm 39 10,4 3. Nungua Agricultural Research Station 40 37.9 4. Ada Cooperative Food Farmers' Union 41b 55.9 Total 160 Average 29.7 ax = 45.6, df = 3, p =< 0.001. bMembers of scheme only. m. ‘ ..- 199 TABLE 65.--Perceived Major Sources of Influence on Innovations Case Study Total Sources of Influence on Innovation Farmers Influ- Scheme Ext ' S d 0th enceda enSlon econ ary er Percentages Afife-Weta State Farm (N=50) 22.5 0.5 11.5 3.0 7.5b Workers' Brigade Farm (N=50) 19.5 0.0 10.0 3.5 6.0c Agricultural Research Station (N=42) 41.7 4.2 25.6 11.9 Ada Cooperative (N=50) 51.0 20.0 12.5 18.5 Average (N=l92) 33.0 6.0 14.4 9.1 3.5 ax= 22.3, df = 3, p = <0.001. bPioneer Tobacco Company. CSugar Factory and Cooperatives of the State Sugar Products Corporation. 200 important. Eighty-two per cent of the COOperative case sample were scheme members. Adoption rates were highest in cases where scheme im- pacts were greatest. The total variation in percentage of farmers in- fluenced from study area to study area could not be explained by chance alone (p = <0.001). Farmer Characteristics and Innovation Farmer characteristics varied little among the case studies. For the full sample of 192 farmers the means were: 48.2 years of age, 35.4 years of residence, 29.0 years of farming experience, 12.0 persons per household consisting of 1.6 wives and 6.7 children of whom 4.6 were living at home. The mean number of school age children (six years and older) was 4.7 of whom 67 per cent had received some formal education. A pattern of a relatively mature and established farming population typified each of the case study areas. In contrast agricultural production1 and innovation among food farmers varied considerably from case to case in the Southern Savanna. In the State Farm and Workers' Brigade study areas median acreages approximated those found throughout much of Ghana, averaging 2.0 and 3.1 acres planted per farmer (Table 66). Significantly greater were the median acreages in the study areas of the Research Station (7.0) 201 TABLE 66.--Acreage and Intercropping Case Study Acreage Farmers Intercropping Mean Mediana Percentages Afife-Weta State Farm (N=50) 3.8 2.0 60 Somanya Workers' Brigade Farm (N=50) 4.8 3.1 48 Nungua Agricultural Research Station (N=42) 11.1 7.0 17 Ada COOperative Food Farmers' Union (N=50) 11.3 10.0 6 Average (N=l92) 6.4 5.5 33 ax= 73.9, df = 3, p =<0.00l. bx: 58.6, df = 3, p =<0.00l. 202 and the Ada Cooperative (10.0). The variance is beyond the realm of chance occurrence (p =.(= 6.3, df = 3, p = <0.05 (pp; significant). dx= 10.4, df = <0.02. w o ‘D II ex= 33.6, df = <0.001. w o '0 II CHAPTER VII--FO0TNOTES 1Productivity, for purposes of this study, was measured in terms of acreage planted in food crops, not in terms of yield. Acreage and yield may be directly related, however, whether this is so or not is not important here since both require farmer investment in time, labor and money. In point of fact, increasing acreage is probably practiced as much to create a buffer against environmental risk as to maximize profits. 205 CHAPTER VIII CONCLUSIONS During the 1960's Ghana attempted to accelerate agricultural development by establishing large-scale agricultural schemes. Though the economy was largely dependent on the agricultural sector, with 60 per cent of the labor force, 50 per cent of gross domestic product, and 70 per cent of value of exports, food crop production did not even keep pace with the rate of population increase of 2.5 per cent - 3.0 per cent per annum. About 99 per cent of all food crops were produced on peasant farms averaging two to three acres in size. Under the Presidency of Dr. Kwame Nkrumah an attempt was made to take away control of food production from peasant farmers and place it in state-run, large-scale schemes. Some 123 Soviet-style State Farms and 40 Israeli-inspired Workers' Brigades were primary among the schemes formed by 1965. Unfortunately, their collective impact on food production was marginal. Implicit in Nkrumah's agricultural revolution was the assump- tion that illiterate food farmers were too unproductive and too tra- ditional in their ways to provide the basis for national agricultural development. Schemes were viewed as an alternative to increase production and at the same time demonstrate modern farming to local farmers 206 207 The purposes of this research were (a) to measure the differen- tial impact of four schemes on small-acreage farmers, (b) to define the traditional farmer in terms of domestic and productivity factors, (c) to determine what factors influence the most innovative and pro- ductive farmers, and (d) to assess whether illiteracy inhibits innova- tion and production. Four hypotheses based on these purposes are tested in each case study and collectively. Data were collected in a spatially discrete region: the Southern Savanna of Ghana (Figure l). The study was based on a sample of 192 food farmers on and around four different types of agricultural develop- ment schemes: (a) the Afife-Weta State Farm, (b) the Somanya Workers' Brigade Farm, (c) the Nungua Agricultural Research Station of the Uni- versity of Ghana, and (d) the Ada Cooperative Food Farmers Union. Conclusions The following conclusions are based on the survey data: Scheme Impact Scheme impact was measured using the Impact Index, based on local farmer perception of and participation in scheme activities. As hypo- thesized there was no inverse relationship between scheme impact and distance between farmer and scheme. Thus, there appeared to be limited "neighborhood effect" of schemes on local farmers. Scheme impact generally was less important in influencing innovation among food farmers than ex- tension services and secondary farmer sources. Farmers most influenced by the schemes were the most innovative, had the largest households and 208 were more advanced in age, though only 24 per cent of variance was ex- plained by these factors in regression analysis. Schemes appear to possess the potential for effecting agricultural development through both increased production and demonstration effect. The same can be said of extension services. Schemes studied in the Southern Savanna, with the most active extension programs, had the greatest impact. In combination, schemes and extension services might produce synergistic gains. The Traditional Farmer Factor analysis of case study data reinforces the view that the traditional farmer is of advanced age, has a large household consisting of many wives and children, has many years of farming experience and residence in a single locale, and enjoys the advantages of the land tenure of his lineage. As hypothesized he is not necessarily unpro- ductive nor uninnovative. In the Southern Savanna, it was observed that the traditional farmer, so defined, was on the contrary, pro- ductive and innovative. The Innovative Farmer Reasonably strong positive correlations were found between innovation and productivity, in terms of acres planted (r = .377), and susceptibility to scheme influences (r = .444), as hypothesized. The innovative farmer also tended to have more travel experience, greater access to radio communication and a higher rate of extension service contact. However, in regression analysis, acreage, scheme impact, 209 travel and radio factors explained only 33 per cent of variance. In- novation and production appear to covary and do not share a casual re- lationship. This fact might suggest a basis for detennination of a target population for extension services. From case to case, farmer domestic characteristics, craps, and perceived problems varied little, but adoption rates and per farmer acreages showed significant variations. Innovation rates and acreage averages were lowest around the Workers' Brigade and State Farm. These case study areas were probably more reflective of conditions found in Ghana as a whole, averaging 2.0 and 3.1 acres planted per farmer. These medians contrasted with those found around the Research Station (7.0) and the Ada Cooperative (10.0). There was also an inverse correlation between acreage and intercropping; but the reasons for this were not clear. The major problems perceived by the farmers were rainfall irregu- larity/water supply and lack of credit. The first of these was most important in the drier areas of the savanna. Credit was an endemic problem. The major source of capital in each case study was the sale of crops and accruing savings. Money was seen as a buffer against environ— mental risks. Another means of decreasing risk among farmers was to overcome labor bottlenecks by use of the tractor for land preparation (67 per cent of 192 farmers) and use of hired labor for weeding (83 per cent). 210 Formal Education On the basis of the evidence it would appear that formal educa- tion is not a necessary condition for agricultural innovation and pro- duction. There was little variance in innovation by level of formal education. The exceptions were those farmers with specialized agricul- tural training. Innovation is not necessarily the domain of the young and educated; in fact, the older illiterate farmers were the most inno- vative among the sample. Policy Implications It would be inappropriate to draw policy implications solely on the basis of this research. Within Ghana agricultural conditions vary spatially to a considerable degree. Neither the Southern Savanna region nor the sample of farmers may necessarily be typical of the country as a whole. If any generalization seems apropos it is that agricultural development depends very much on understanding the details of the in- dividual case. However, a number of implications seem to emerge from the case studies for purposes of structuring further research or in formulating policy: (1) Large-scale agricultural schemes in Ghana seem to have had an unexploited potential for promoting agricultural devel- opment. The notable relationship between innovation and both scheme impact and extension service contact, might suggest consideration of joint scheme-extension programs for farmers. Schemes can be vehicles for extension. (2) Planners must not loose sight of the need for integrating schemes with the localities to maximize their utility for overall agricultural development. The externally—funded schemes focussed on in this research unfortunately did not initially do this. (3) (4) (5) (6) (8) (9) 211 Since the most productive farmers are likely to be the most innovative and the most susceptible to scheme in- fluences, development programs Should be targeted on these farmers. In the micro-Spatial context, scheme-based extension pro- grams will not be limited in impact to the close-in farmers. The traditional farmer is not necessarily conservative, subsistence-oriented, uninnovative or unproductive, and thus Should be considered a major element in an agricul- tural development program. Since a majority of the fanning population are mature and illiterate, agricultural development programs should not skew emphasis to the younger, educated farmers. If formal education is not a necessary condition for agri- cultural develOpment, there is little reason to avoid i1- literate farmers in agricultural training and extension programs. The substantial variance in innovation and production within a region of similar fanner characteristics, crops and prob- lems, may suggest that the major difficulty facing agri- cultural development in Ghana is not getting farmers to produce and innovate, but providing the proper inputs, credit and infrastructural support. Planners should not be distracted from the fundamental tasks of overcoming risk factors in the farming environ- ment, such as scarcity of credit and inputs and inadequate irrigation facilities. Further research on rural environments should be integrated with the government decision-making process. Government should take an active rather than a passive role. In this connection the work of the type carried on by the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research (ISSER) at the University of Ghana is to be commended. Further research is needed on the impact of risk reduction, the influence of differential credit among farmers, the utility of adult education and/ or agricultural training for farmers, and reasons for cooperative 212 success and failure. Useful research in combination with capable leadership among those making decisions will provide important keys to rural development in Ghana. BIBLIOGRAPHY W Apeadu, K. K. Notes on the History of the Gold Coast Cooperative Movement. Accra: Ministry of Agriculture, November, 1956. Ascroft, Joseph R.; R01109. Nieis G.; Kerr, Graham B.; and Hursh, Gerald 0. Patterns of Diffusion in Rural Eastern Nigeria. East Lansing: Michigan State University, February, 1967. Aveyime Rice and Sugar Cane Irrigation Project, Ghana. Two volumes. London: Commonwealth Development Corporation, 1968. Barclay's West African Directory, 1970-71. London: Skinner and Co., Ltd., 1970. Bentsi-Enchill, K. Agricultural Credit in Ghana. Edited by Dott. A. Gluffre. Milano: Institute Di Diritto Agrario Internationale, 1964. Brammer, H. Soils of the Accra Plains. Memoir No. 3. Kwadaso, Kumasi: Soil ResearCh Institute, 1967. , ed. Vegetation Studies on the Accra Plains 1951-52. Kwadaso, KumaSii' Soil Research Institute, 1958. Clark, W. M., and Hutchinson, F. H. British West African Rice Mission's Report on the Possibilities of Expanding the Praduction of Rice in the BritiSh West African Coibnies. Report to the Secretary of State for Colonies. Londbn: Secretary of State for Colonies, 1948. de Surgys Albert. Ewe Fetish Shrines. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1970. . La Peche Traditionelle sur le Littoral Evhe at Mina (De l'Embouchure de la Vblta au Dahomey)? iParis: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, T966. Fiawoo, Dzigbodi K. Social Survey of Tefle. Child Development Mono- graph No. 2. Legon: Institute of Education, 1961. 213 Ghana. 214 Agricultural Development Bank Organization and Function. Accra: l968. Annual Report of the Irrigation, Reclamation and Drainage Division, 1968. Accra: Ministry of Agriculture, 1969. Annual Report of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies, l JOly, 1966-31 June,gl967. Accra: August, 1968. Annual Report of the Training and Manpgwer Division, Ministry of Agriculture, for the Year 1968. Accra: l969. Census of ngulation 1960. Six volumes. Accra: Census Office, 1964. Census of Population 1960. Special Report E. Tribes of Ghana. Accra: Census Office, 1964. Central Bureau of Statistics. Economic Survey 1968. Accra: l969. Cooperative Societies Decree 1968. Decree 252. Accra: National Liberation Council, 1968. Cooperatives. Development Service Institute. National Investment Bank. Accra: 1964. Feasibility Repprt on Sugar and Rice Production Project in Accra Plain. Report for the Government of Ghana. Tokyo: Nippon Koei Co., Ltd., September, 1967. Feasibility Study for the Avu-Keta Project, Volta Region, Ghana. Six volumes. Western Germany: WAKUTI, December, 1968. Ghana Atlas. 12 maps. Accra: 1958. Manpower Board. First Annual Report. Accra: 1969. Ministry of Agriculture, Division of Economics and Statistics. Crop Area, Yield and Production l965~l967. Accra: 1969. Ministry of Agriculture, Division of Economics and Statis- tics. Statistics of Large-Scale,Specialized, Institutional, Cooperative and Young Farmer League Farming and Service Stations 1965. Accra: 1967. Ministry of Agriculture. State Farms Corporation. Technical and Economic Report on Afife-Weta State Farm. Accra: 1965. 215 Registrar of COOperative Societies. Model Rules for a Cooperative Farming Society. Accra: l969. Report of the Commission Appointed to Enqoire into the Functions, Operation andiAdministration of the WorkersTBrigade (Majbrity and“Mibbrity Reports). Accra: State PUbliShihg Cor- poration for Ministry of Information, 1969. . Report of the Committee on Agricultural Indebtedness. Accra: Ministry of Agricu1ture, 1967. State Farms Corporation First Biennial Annual Report. Accra: State Farms Corporation, 1964. State Farms Corporation Instrument, 1965. Legal Instrument 398: Accra: March, 1965. The Annual Estimates, Agriculture. Eight volumes. Accra:' State Publishing Corporation, 1961-1970. White Peper on the Builders' Brigode Act, 1957. Accra: Gound, State Publishing Corporation for Ministry of Information, 1957. White Paper on the Report of the Commission of Enqpirypinto the Functions, Operations and Administration of the Workers' Bri ade. No. 8. Accra: State Publishing Corporation for Ministry of Information, 1968. Peter. Spotial Diffusion. Commission on College Geography Resources Paper No. 4. Washington, D. C.: 1969. Graham, Charles Kojo. A Report on the Cattle Industry Around Nungoa. Hursh, Hursh, Kaiser Shell Prize for Agricbiture41968. Legon: Faculty of Agricu1ture, 1968. Gerald 0.; Hershfield, Allan; Kerr, Graham B.; and Roling, Niels G. Communication in Eastern Nigeria: An Experiment in Introducing Change. East Lansing: Michigan State University, July, 1968. Gerald 0.; Roling, Niels G.; and Kerr, Graham B. Success and Failure of Agricultural Programs in 71 Villages of Eastern Nigeria. East Lansing: Michigan State University, September, 1968. Engineers and Constructors. Accra Plains Irrigation Feasibilipy Study. Report for the Volta River Authority, Government of Ghana. Two volumes. Accra: 1965. Knipling, E. F., and McDuffie, R. "Files that Affect Livestock," Yearbook of Agriculture, 1956: Animal Diseases. Washington, D. C.: Government Priting Office, 1956. 216 La Anyane, S. Report on a Survey of Ho-Keta Areas (1. Abutiag 2. Pjelego- Warrya; 3. Dodze and Abor; 4. Adidome). Accra: Department of Agriculture, 1954. Manoukian, Madeline. Akan and Ga-Adangme Peoples. Ethnographic Survey of West Africa, Part 1. Edited by Daryll Forde. London: In- ternational African Institute, 1950. . The EweeSpeaking People of quoland and the Gold Coast. Ethnographic Survey of West Africa, Part IV. Edited by Daryll Forde. London: International African Institute, 1952. Mensah-Ansah, J. A. Report on the Soils of the Somanya Workers' Brigade Mechanized Farm. Technical Report No. 55, Kumasi: Ghana Academy of Sciences, Agricultural Research Institute, 1963. . Soils of Afife State Farm. Kwadaso: Soils Research In- stitute, 1965. Miracle, Marvin P., and Seidman, Ann. Agricu1tura1 Cooperatives and Quasi-Cooperatives in Ghana, 195111965. Madison: Land Tenure Center, 1968. . State Farms in Ghana. No. 3 Publication. Madison: Land Tenure Center, 1968. Montague, A. D. T. Agricultural Survey of the Keta-Ada District. Accra: Department of Agriculture, 1941’ Partners in Development: Report of the Commission on International Development (The Pearson Report). Report for IBRD. Lester Pearson, Chairman. New York: Praeger, 1969. Platt, B. S., and Mayer, J. Report of Joint FAD/WHO Mission to Ghana, 1 59. Report for Ghana by FAD/WHO. 59/5/3880. Accra: 1959. Pogucki, R. J. H. Gold Coast (Ghana) Land Tenure. Vol. 11: Report on Land Tenure in Adangme Customary Law. 2nd edition. Accra: State Publishing Corporation, 1968. . Land Tenure in Ghana. Vol. VI: General Principles of Land Tenure in Ghana. Accra: Lands Department, 1957. . Report on Land Tenure in Customary Law of the Non-Akan Areas of the Gold Coast ColonyglNow Western Region of Ghana). 2nd edition. Accra: Lands Department, 1968. Purnell, M. F. Detailed Soil Survey of Ohawu Agricultural Station, Babile. Kwadaso: Soils Research Institute, 1956. Quansah, S. T. Land Use in the Ho-Keta Plains. Accra: Department of Agriculture, 1957. 217 Reusse, Eberhard. Ghana's Food Industries, 1968. Report for FAO and UNOP (SpeciaTFUnd). EROme: April, 1968. Saarinen, Thomas F. Perception of Environment. Commission on College Geography Resource Paper No. 5. Washington, D. C.: 1969. Sekyere, D. A., and McCorvey, R. J. Better Vegetables. Accra: Ghana Academy of Sciences and U.S.A.I.D. Mission to Ghana, 1966. Stein, J. T. H. "Agriculture in the Keta-Ada District." Yearbook. Accra: Gold Coast Department of Agriculture, 1929. Thompson, H. Agricultural Survey, Western Tongu Area, Trans-Volta, Togoland. Accra: Department of Agriculture, 1955: Uchendu, Victor C. "Field Survey of Agricultural Change: The Cocoa Farmers of Akim Abuakua: Eastern Region, Ghana," Economic, Cultural and Technical Determinants of Agricultural Chan e in Tropical Africa. Preliminary Report No. 8. Stanford: ood Research Institute, June, 1969. United Nations. Food and Agriculture Organization. Crop Production Feasibilities under Conditions of Irrigotion in the Vblta Flood PTain Area. By R. G. Heath} Report No. 1404. Rome: ‘1961 . Foods and Nutrition. Report to the Government of Ghana. Report No. 1449. Rome: FAO, 1962. Population and Food Supply. Basic Study No. 7 in Freedom From Hunger Campaign. Rome: FAD, circa 1962. . Report on Survey of the Lower Volta River Flood Plain. Five volumes. Rome: FAO and UNDP (Special FundiiProject in Ghana, 1963. Report on the Possibilities of African Rural Development in Relation to Economic and Sodial'Growth. FAO Africa Survey. Rome: FAO, 1962. The State of Food and Agriculture 1970. Rome: 1970. United Nations. Food and Agriculture Organization, and Economic Com- mission for Africa. Fourth Inter-regional Seminar on Development Plannin , Development Pros ects and Plannin fbr the Comin Décade (with SpeClal RefeFgfiEE"TBTATFTEETT‘STSDRT'47A7RT"T'and 2. Meeting in Accra, Ghana. Accra: 4-13’December, l968. Addis Ababa: FAO?ECA, 1968. 218 United Nations. Food and Agriculture Organization; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization; and World Health Organization. A Study_of the Agroclimatology of the Semi-Arid Area South of'the Sahara in West Africa. Rome: 1967. United Nations. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. An African Experiment in Radio Forums for Rural Development, Ghana, 1964/1965. *Reports ana"PaperS deMass Communications, Paris: *UNEBCO, l968. United States. The World Food Problem: A Report of the President's Science AdvisoryCommittee. Vol. II: Report of theTanel on World Food Supply. Five vols. Washington,jT.CT: The Wliite House, May, 1967. University College of the Gold Coast. Guide to the Agricultural Research Station, Nungua. Legon: Agricultural RESearEHTStation, 1955. University of Ghana. Annual Reports, 1963-64, 1964-65, 1965-66, 1966-67. Kpong: Agricultural Research Station, 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968, respectively. . Annual Reports, 1966-67, 1967-68, 1968-69. Legon: Agricultural”ResearCh Station, Nungua, 1968, 1969, 1970, respectively. University of Ghana, Faculty of Agriculture. Report of the Symposium on Farm Mechanization. Legon, 7th and.8th January, 1969. Accra: *Council foFTScientific and Industrial Research, 1969. Walker, H. 0. "Application of Penman's Method for the Estimation of Open-Water Evaporation," Departmental Note No. 3. Accra: Gold Coast Meteorological Department,71956. Walter, M. W. "Dependability of Rainfall in Ghana," Department Note No. 14. Accra: Ghana Meteorological Department,ll959. Books Alian, William. The African Husbandman. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1965. Anschel, K.; Brannon, R.; and Smity, E., eds. Agricultural Cooperatives and Markets in Developing Countries. New York: *Praeger, 1969. Arensberg, Conrad M., and Niehoff, Arthur H. IntroducingfiSocial Chapge, Chicago: Aldine, 1964. 219 Bascom, William R., and Herskovits, Melville J., eds. Continuity and Chan e in African Cultures. Chicago: University of Chitago Press, I964 Birmingham, Walter; Neustadt, 1.; Omaboe, E. N., eds. A Stpgy of Contemporary Ghana in Two Volumes. Vol. I: The—Economy of GhanaJi—Vol. II: Some‘ASpects of Social Structure. ’London; George Allen and Urwin, Ltd., 1966. Boserup, Ester. The Conditions of Agricultural Growth: The Economics of Agrarian Change_under Populatioanressure. Chicago: ‘Aldine, 1965. Butcher, D. A. P.; Amarteifio, G. W.; and Whitham, D. E. Tema Manhean: A Social and ArchitecturalStudyof a New Fishing Village. Accra: Ghana University Press, 1964} Caldwell, John C., and Okonjo, Chukuka. The Po ulation of Tropical Africa. Ibadan; Longman's (Nigeria), I988. Chambers, Robert. Settlement Schemes in Tropical Africa: A Stud of Organizations and Development. New York: ‘Praeger,‘l969. de Wilde, John C.; McLoughlin, F. M.; Gulnard, Andre; Scudder, Thayer; and Maubouche, Robert. Experiences wippAgpjcultural Development in Tropical Africa. Two v01s. *For IBRD. Baltimore: *thns Hopkins Press, 1967. Dickson, Kwamina B. A Historical Geo rophy of Ghana. New York: Cambridge University’Press,ll . Duckham, A. N.; and Masefield, G. B. Farming:Systems of the World. New York: Praeger, 1970. Dumont, Rene. False Start in Africa. Translated by Phyllis Nautsott. New York: Praeger, 1966. Eicher, Carl, and Witt, Lawrence, eds. A riculture in Economic - Development. New York: McGraw-Hiil, I964. Field, M. J. Search for Security, London: Faber and Faber, 1960. . Social Or anization of the Ga People. London: Crown Agents, I940. Gourou, Pierre. The Trapical World: Its Socialrand Economic Conditions and Its Future Status. ranslated’by EL 0.2Labordé. 4th ed. London: ltongmans, Green and Co., 1966. 220 Gregor, H. F. Geogropoy of Agriculture: Themes of Research. Founda- tions of Economic Geography Series. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1970. Gregory, S. Statistical Methods and the Geographer. 2nd ed. London: Longmans, l968. Hagerstrand, T. Innovation Diffusion as a Spatial Process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967. Haggett, Peter. Location. Analysis in Human Geography. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1966. Handbook of Tropical and Subtropical Horticulture. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1969. Harvey, David. Expianation in Geography. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1969. Hill, Polly. Studies in Rural Capitalism in West Africa. Ibadan: Cambridge University Press, 1969} . The Migrant Cocoa Farmers of Southern Ghana: A Study in Rural Copitalism. London: Cambridge University‘Press,bl963. Hirschman, Albert 0. Development Projects Observed. Washington: The Brookings Institution,il967. Hopkins, Brian. Forest and Savanna: An Introduction to Tropical Plant Ecologyiwith Special—Reference to West Africa. *Ibadan: Heinemann,‘1965. Huber, Hugo. The Krobo: Traditionai,_Social_1 and Religious Life of a West African People. VolT'XVI. TranSlation. St. Augustin near Bonn: The Anthropos Institute, 1964. Johnston, Bruce F. The Staple Food Economies of Western Tropical Africa. Studies in Tropical Development, Food ResearCh Institute, Stanford, California. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1958. Jones, William 0. Economic Man in Africa. Stanford: Food Research Institute, May, 1960. . Manloc in Africa. Studies in Tropical Development. Stanford} Stanford University Press, 1959. Kamarck, Andrew M. The Economics of African Development. New York: Praeger, 1967. 221 Kreinin, Mordecha. Israel and Africa: A Study in Technical Cooperation. New York: Praeger, 1964. May, Jacques W. The Ecology of Malnutrition in Middle Africa. New York: Hafner, 1965: Mellor, John W. The Economics of Agricultural Development. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1966. Miller, Norman N., ed. Research in Rural Africa. East Lansing: Michigan State University, 1969. Millikan, Max F., and Mapgood, David. No Easy Harvest. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1967. Manshard, Walther. Die Geoaraphischen der Wirtscraft Ghanas: unter Besonderer Beruckslchtigupg, Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Variog GMBH, 1961. La Anyane, Seth. Ghana Agriculture: ItpEconomic Development from Early Times to the Middle of the Twentieth Century. London: Oxford University Press, 1963. Nye, P. H., and Greenland, D. J. The Soil Under Shifting Cultivation. Farnham Royal: Commonwealth Agricu1tura1 Bureaux, 1960. Papadakis, J. Crop Ecologic Survey in West Africa (Liberia,iIvory Coast, Ghana,ingo, Dahomey, Nigeria). 2 Vbls. Rome: FAO, 1965 and 1966. Phillips, T. A. An Agricultural Notebook. 2nd ed. Ikeja: Longman's (Nigeria),i1964. Rogers, Everett. Modernization Among Peasants: The Impact of Comunica- tion. New York: Halt, Rinéhart and Winston, 1968. The Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Glencoe, The Free Press, 1962. Savile, A. H. Extension in Rural Communities. London: Oxford UniversityiPress,il965. Schultz, Theodore W. Transforming Traditional Agriculture. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1964. Southworth, Herman M., and Johnston, Bruce F., eds. Agricultural Development and Economic Growth. Ithaca, New Ybrki Cornell UhiverSity Press, 1967. 222 Stewart, J. L., and Jeffreys, M. D. W. The Cattle of the Gold Coast. Accra: Government Printer, 1956. Stokke, Baard Richard. "Ghana," Soviet and Eastern European Trade and Aid in Africa. New York: —Ptaeger,fil967. Symons, Lesile. Agricultural Geography. London: G. Bell and Sons, Lts., l968. Tindall, H. 0. Fruits and Vegetables in West Africa. Rome: FAO. 1955- Vidal de la Blache, Paul. Principles of Human Geography. Edited by Emmanuel de Mortonne. Translated"by Millicent Todd Bingham. London: Constable, 1926. Ward, W. E. F. A History of Ghana. 4th. ed. London: George Allen and Unwhu Ltd.,1967. Wharton, Clifton C., Jr. ed. Subsistence Agriculture and Economic Development. Chicago: Aldine, 1969. Willis, J. Brian, ed. Agriculture and Land Use in Ghana. Oxford: University Press, l967. Articles Adeaboye, R. 0.; Basu, A. C.; and Olatunbosun, Dupe. "Impact of Western Nigerian Farm Settlements on Surrounding Farmers,"- The Ni erian Journal of Economic and Social Studies, I, No. 2 (July, 1959). 229-240. ' Ahn, Peter M. "The Effects of Large-Scale Mechanized Agriculture on the Physical Properties of West African Solis," Ghana Journal of Agricultural Science, I, No. l (1968), 35-40. Azu, N. N. A. "Adangbe History," The Gold Coast Review, II, No. 2 (1926), 240-244. Bigelow, Ross Edgar. "The Dynamics of Agricultural Evolution Under Population Pressure," Peninsular,_I, No. 1 (May, 1967), 21-23. Blaut, J. M. "Microgeographic Sampling," Economic Geography, XXXV (1959), 79-88. Boateng, E. A. "Recent Changes in Settlement in South-East Gold Coast," Transactions and Papers, Institute of British Geographers (1955). Church, R. J. Harrison. "Observations on Large Scale Ijrigation Development in Africa," ECALFAO Joint Agricultural Division, Agricultural Economics Bdlletin for Africa, No. 4 (Noviil963), 1-43. 223 . "Problems and Development of the Dry Zone of West Africa," The Geographical Journal, CXXVII, Part 2 (June, 1961), 187-204. Coursey, D. G. "The Role of Yams in West African Food Ec-nomies," World Crops, XVII, No. 2 (April, 1943), 54-65. Eicher, Carl. "Tackling Africa's Employment Problems," Africa Report, XVI, No. 1 (January, 1971), 30-33. Field, M. J. "The Agricultural System of the Manya-Krobo of the Gold Coast," Africa, XIV, No. 2 (April, 1943), 54-65. Floyd, Barry, and Adinde, Monica. "Farm Settlements in Eastern Nigeria: A Geographical Appraisal," Economic Geography, XLIII, No. 3 (muly, 1967), 189-230. Fogg, C. Davis. "Economic and Social Factors Affecting the Development of Small Holder Agriculture in Eastern Nigeria," Economic Development and Cultural Change, XIII, No. 3 (1965), 280-286. “Ghana's State Farms,” West Africa, No. 2678, (28 September, 1968), p. 1139. Gilbert, A. A. E. "The Teshi Settlement of Accra Plains," Nigerian Geographical Journal, IX, No. l, (1966), 45-53. Gordon, James. "Rural Sociology and Economics in Relation to Agricultural Development in West Africa: an Annotated Bibliogrpahy," Ghana Journal ofiAgricultural Science, I, (1968), 173-178. Gould, Peter R. "Wheat on Killmanjaro: The Perception of Choice Within Game and Learning Model Frameworks," General Systems. Edited by Ludwig von Bertalanffy and Anatol Rapoport. ‘Yearbook of the Society for General Systems Resea ch, X, (1965) 157-166. Hance, William A. "The Gezira Scheme: A Study in Agricultural Develop- ment." African Economic Development. Edited by Wilham A. Hance, 2nd ed. London: ’PblllMall, 1967, 31-53. Hagerstrand, 1. "Quantitative Techniques for Analysis of the Spread of Information and Technology,“ Education and Economic Development. Edited by C. Anderson and M. Bowman. *Chicago: Aldine,41965. Hall, J. B., and Jenik, J. "Contribution Towards the Classification pf Sayanna in Ghana," Bulletin de I'IFAN. T. XXX, ser. A, No. 1 1968 . , and Pople, W. "Recent Vegetational Changes in the Lower VOlta River,“ Ghana Journal of Science, VIII, No. l and 2 (January and April, 1968). 224 Hilton, T. E. "The Volta Resettlement Project,“ Journal of Tropical Geography, XXIV (June, 1967), 12-21. Hunter, John M. "Ascertaining Population Carrying Capacity Under Traditional Systems of Agriculture in Developing Countires," The Professional Geographer: XVIII, No. 3 (May, 1966), 151-154. . "Cocoa Migration and Patterns of Land Ownership in the Densu Valley Near Suhum, Ghana," Transactiona, Institute of British Geographers, No. 33 (1963), 61-87. . "Population Pressure in a Part of the West African Savanna; a Study of Nangodl, Northeast Ghana," Annals of the Association of American Geographers, LVII, No. 1(March,il967), 10l1114. . "Regional Patterns of Population Growth in Ghana 1948-60," Essays in Geography fbr Austin Miller. Edited by J. B. Whittow andP. 0.7%05 Reading: 1965. . "Seasonal Hunger in a Part of the West African Savanna: 1A Survey of Body Weights in Nangodl, Northeast Ghana," Trans- actions, Institute of British Geographers, No. 41 (1967). , Jarmai, S. "A New Fast Method for the Production of Kokonte," Ghana Journal of Agricultural Science, I (1968), 59-63. Johnston, Bruce F., and Meller, John W. "The Role of Agriculture in Economic Development." American Economic Review, LI (September, 1961), 571-581. Jones, William O. "Manioc: An Example of Innovation in African Economics," Economic Development and Cultural Change, V. No. 2 (January, 1957), 97-117. Lawson, G. W. "Ghana." Acta Phytogeographica Suecica 54: Conservation of Vegetation in Africa South of the Sahara. Proceedingp_of a Symposium. Uppsaia, September, 1966, 1968. "The Littoral Ecology of west Africa," Oceanographic Marine Biology Annual Review, No. 4. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1966, 406-448. , and Jenik, J. "Observations on Microclimate and Vegetation Interrelationships on the Accra Plains (Ghana)," Journal of Ecology, LV (November, 1967), 773-785. Lawson, Rowena M. "Innovation and Growth in Traditional Agriculture of the Lower Volta, Ghana," Journal of Development Studies, IV, No. 1 (October, 1967), 138-149. 225 . "Summary of a Study of Labour Input into Traditional Agri- cfilture on the Lower Volta of Ghana," Jounral of Agricultural Economics, XVIII, No. 3 (1967), 403-405} . "The Growth of the Fishing Industry in Ghana," The Economic Bulletin of Ghana, XI, No. 3 (1967, 3-24. . "The Markets for Food in Ghana," Economic Bulletin of Ghana, X, No. l (1966), 38-51. Manshard, W. "Agarische 'Organizations for Men' fur den Binnenmarkt bestimmter Kuituren in Waldgurtel Ghanas." ("Huza System of the Krobo"), Erkinde, II, No. 3 (1957), 215-232. Miracle, Marvin P. "Subsistence Agriculture: Analytical Problems and Alternative Concepts." American Journal of Agricultural Economics, (May, 1968), 292-310. Murdock, G. P. "Staple Subsistence Crops of Africa." Geographical Review, L, No. 4 (1960), 523-540. Nene Azzu Mate-Kale, “The Historical Background of Krobo Customs." Transactions of the Gold Coast and Togoland, Historical Society, Lilo. 4 11955), 133-140. Nsowah, G. F. "Review of Tomato Experiments in Northern Ghana from 1962 to 1966.“ Ghana Journal of Agricultural Science, II, No. 1 (1969 . Offeri, E. O. "Tstse Files in Ghana," Ghana Journal of Science, IV, No. 2 (October, 1964), 141-156. Porter, Philip W. "Environmental Potentials and Economic Opportunities, A Background for Cultural Adaptation," American Anthropologist, LXVII, No. 2 (April, 1965), 409-420. Quartey-Papafio, A. Bol. "The Ga Homowo Festival." Journal of African Sociolo , IXX, No. 74 (January, 1920), 126-34, and no. 75 (April, l920), g27-232. Rivkin, Arnold. "Economic Incentives in African Life," Journal of African Administration, XII, No. 4 (October, 1960), 224-227 Rogers, Everett M. "Communication Research and Rural Development," Rural Africana, No. 5 (Spring, 1968), 3-10. Rose Innes, R. "Grasslands, Pastures and Fodder Production," Agriculture and Land Use in Ghana. Edited by Brian Wills, Londonzileford UhiVersity Press, 1962. 226 Sinnadurai, Suppiah. "Tomato." Le on Extension Bulletin No. l. Legon: Department of Crop Science, aculty of Agriculture, University of Ghana, (circa 1968). Stein, J. T. H. "Agriculture, in the Keta-Ada District." Yearbook, Gold Coast Department of Agriculture. Accra: 1929, l52-160. Wharton, Clifton R., Jr. "Education and Agricultural Growth: The Role of Education in Early Stage Agriculture,“ Education and Economic Develo ment. Edited by C. Anderson and M. Sowman. Chicago: Alidine, 1965, 202-228. Unpoblished Materials and Other Sources Abierh, F. S. "Land Use of Teshie and Its Villages.“ Unpublished B.A. dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Ghana, Leon, 1966. Adjaklo, J. E. A. "Population and Settlement in Tongu." Unpublished B.A. dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Ghana, Legon, 1966. Ahn, Peter M. "Water Resources in the Ashaiman-Dodowa Area of the Accra Plains, South-East Ghana." Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ghana, Legon, January, 1065. (Mimeographed.) p. 5. (legal). Amegashitsi, S. J. "An Agricu1tura1 Geography of the Avenor District in the Volta Region." Unpublished B.A. dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Ghana, Legon, 1966. Amuzu-erglo, A. "The People and Food Production of the Batter District." Unpublished B. A. dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Ghana, Legon, l968. Ascroft, Joseph R. "A Factor Analytic Investigation of Modernization Among Kenya Villagers." Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Department of Communication, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, 1966. Bigelow, Ross Edgar. "A Preliminary Analysis of Food Supply and Population Density in Ghana." Unpublished manuscript, Michigan State University, March, 1968. Booth, A. H. "The Niger, the Volta and the Dahomey Gap as Geographic Barriers." Department of Zoology, University College of Ghana, 13 June, 1957. Brammer, M. "Solis of the Ho-Keta Plains." Soil Research Institute, Kwadaso, Kumashi, 1957. (Typewritten.) 227 Brenner, V. S., and Wagenbuhr, H. T. M. "Lime Farmers, A Cast Study of A Cash Crop in a Subsistence Economy.". Social Science Project, University College of Cape Coast, Ghana, May, 1968. (Mimeographed.) Caldwell, John C. "Determinants of Rura-Urban Migration in Ghana." Paper presented at Michigan State University, East Lansing, June, 1968. ~ . "Population Change and Rural Transformation in Ghana." The Population Council, circa 1965. (Mimeographed.) "The Demographic Implications of the Extension of Education in a Developing Country: Ghana.“ Report by the Regional Director for Africa, Demographic Division of the Population Council, 1967. (Mimeographed.) Charter, C. F. "Estate Agriculture and the Integration of Peasant Farming." Miscellaneous Paper No. 1, Gold Coast Deparment of Soil and Land-Use Survey, Kumasi, 1954. (Typewritten.) "Further Observations on Estate Agriculture and the Integration of Peasant Farming with Special Reference to Agri- cultural Education." Soils Research Institute, Kwadaso, Kumasi, l955. (Typewritten.) Cudjoe, G. C. N. "A Study of the International Exchange Economy of Food Staples within the Anlo Area." Unpublished B. A. disserta- tion, Department of Geography, University of Ghana, Legon, 1958. Ojang, Yuan H. "Some Ideas to be Incorporated in the Procedures and Policies for Achieving Speedy Full Development of New Irrigable and Drained Areas in Developing Countires." FAO Project Manager, Ghana, 1967. (Draft.) . "Some Information on Farming by Small Holdings." Accra, 15November, l968. (Mimeographed.) Dodoo, R. "State and Co-operative Farms with Special Reference to the Eastern Region.“ Unpublished B.A. dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Ghana, Legon, 1966. Durbunner, H. W. "Extracts from Yilo Krobo Church History." Letter, 4 August, 1961. Fiati, W. C. "Ghana-Togo Border: A Study in Political Geography." Unpublished B.A. dissertation, Department of Geography, Legon, 1966. Ghana. "Contract Between the Government of the Republic of Ghana and the Ghana Agricultural Development Joint Venture (Bonifica, Condotte D'Acqua, Impresit, Borini Prono) for Agricultural Development of the Accra Plain and Other Areas." Accra, April, 1969. 228 Glover, B. K. "Economic Geography of Tongu." Unpublished B.A. disser- tation, Department of Geography, University of Ghana, Legon, 1964. Gordon, James. “Problems of 'Settled Farming' in the Humid Tropics." Faculty of Agriculture, Legon, l969. . "State Farms in Ghana (The Political Deformation of Agricultural Development)." Case Study, Report 12 h, Legon, l968. (Mimeographed.) Hill, Polly. "Ewe Seine Fisherman." Institute of African Studies (draft papers), Legon, 1963. Johnson, Ray. "Focus and Concentrate Programme." U.S.A.I.D. (Ghana), Accra, 1966. (Mimeographed). Kowu-Tsri, J. T. "The Effects of the Volta River Project on the Tongus of Lower Volta Flood Plains." Unpublished B.A. dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Ghana, Legon, l968. Kuiui, P. Y. "The Coconut Industry in Keta District." Unpublished B.A. dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Ghana, Legon, 1965. Lawson, Rowena M. "Processes of Rural Economic Growth: A Case Study of the Change from a Statis to a Transitional Economy in the Lower Volta of Ghana 1954-l967." Volta Basin Research Project Technical Report No. x27, Accra, December, 1968. (Mimeorgraphed.) Miracle, Marvin P. "Agricultural Policy and Planning in Ghana and the Ivory Coast, 1960-66.“ Circa 1967. (Mimeographed.) Obeng-Boampong, J. A. "Economic Geography of Afigya." Unpublished B.A. dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Ghana, Legon, 1963. Olatunbosun, Dupe. "Nigerian Farm Settlements and School Leavers' Farms--Profitability, Resource Use and Social-Psychological Consideration." Consortium for the Study of Nigerian Rural Development (CSNRD) Report No. 9. Unoublished Ph.D. Thesis. East Lansing; Department of Agricultural Economics, Michigan State University, 1967. Otchere, Emmanuel Obiri. "Preliminary Observations of Milk Production Among the Fulanis on the Accra Plains." Special unpublished dissertation (B.Sc.), Faculty of Agriculture, University of Ghana, Legon, June, 1966. 229 Reusse, Eberhard, and Lawson, Rowena M. “The Effect on Economic Development of Metropolitan Marketing--A Cast Study of Food Retail Trade in Accra." Legon, Department of Economics, June, 1968. (Mimeographed, p. 15.) Riddell, J. "Structure, Diffusion and Response: The Spatial Dynamics of Modernization in Sierre Leone." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Pennsylvania State University, 1969. "Traditional African Agricultural Systems and their Improvement." Sixth Agricultural Seminar, Ibadan, Nigeria, 16-20 November, 1970. Sutherland, D. A. "The Manya-Krobo State." Unpublished manuscript, 1931. Tagoe, C. E., and Ojang, Y. H. "Irrigation Policy for Accra-Ho-Keta Area." Ministry of Agriculture, Accra, May, 1967. (Mimeographed.) Teriabi, S. "Settlement and Land Use in the Manya Krobo District." Unpublished B.A. dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Ghana, Legon, 1965. Tetteh, E. K. "Commercial Cattle Raising on the Accra Plains." Unpublished B.A. dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Ghana, Legon, l968. Tettey, D. K. "Shallot Industry in South Anlo." Unpublished B.A. dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Ghana, Legon, 1960. Tu Pen-Yu. "The Outlines of Farming Work Programme--The Agricu1tura1 Mission From the Republic of China to Ghana--Afife-Volta Region." Afife, March, 1969. (Mimeographed.) University of Ghana, Agricultural Research Station, Nungua, Files, 1952-1969. Ward, Barbara E. "The Social Organization of the Ewe-Speaking Peoples," Unpublished M.A. Thesis, University of London, 1949. Yegbe, J. B. "The Anlo and Their Neighbours, 1850-1890." Unpublished M.A. thesis, African Studies Institute, University of Ghana, 1966. APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FARMERS 230 231 APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FARMERS INTERVIEW CHARACTERISTICS 1. Code Number 2. Place of InterView 3. Language of Interview 4. Interview Distractions (if anyl' 5. Date FARMER CHARACTERISTICS 6. How many years olf are you? 7. What is your first language?' 8. What is your hometown? 9. When were you last in yourihometown? 10. When do you normally return to your hometown? 11. Where do you live now? 12. How many years/months have you lived'where you lite noW?____ 13. How many years/months have you farmed in this area? 14. How far (in miles, etc.) is your present homre from the "scheme" (State Farm, etc.)? 15. Do you live in your own room, house, or compound? 16. Of what is you house constructed? 17. How many people live in your household at present? (a) Total? (b) Wives? (c) Children? (d) Grandchildren? (e) Other? 18. How many of’your children have gone or are going to school? Past Present (a) Secondary school (b) Middle school (c) Primary school (d) No schooling 19. What is/are your religion(s)? FARMER PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION AND CONSUMPTION 20. Do you work for the "Scheme"? No (If no, skip to Question 24.) Yes 21. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 23: 24. 232 What is your job title? How many years/months have you worked'for the "scheme"7“ Do you plan to continue working for the "Scheme in the future? Do you have a farm/farms of your ownl: No (If no, skip to Question 50. ) Yes Where is7are your farm(s) ggcated? l3) - l4) What db you raiEe on your fam (S )7 Acres Yield Prices Comments Product (this year) (last year) (last year) Cassava Rice Maize Sugar Cane Groundnuts Cattle Other Livestock Vegetables (Specify) Other When do you usudlly work on youriérm(sl during thé growing season? Hours. Morning Afternoon Days: Mon Tue ‘Wed’ ’Thus _Fri Sat Sun When do yoTl—plant'Tp) 'hd harvest (h)— our crop-7— (Abbreviations: Cassava (C), Maize (M, etc.) Jan Feb Mar ”Apr May_ June _July Aug Sep OctT—'Nov How—did you “obtdih'the use of you land? Stole land (no permission needed) ..... Chief gave permission ................. Family owns the land................. Land rented/hired...................... Other ................. ............ If you were to divide your total production into ten parts, what part of the total would you estimate is consumed by your household? (If 100%, skip to Question 35. ) % What part would you estimate you sell? % What part is lost through spilage/infestation or remains unharvested? Spoilage/infestation % Unharvested __ . % thN-fl la.:f 33. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 233 Where do you market your products? Market ‘ Crops . _ ... Comment What form of transport do you use? (Specify season.) Foot Lorry Tractor Other Where db you get the money you need to do your farming (specify) Sale of crops.savihgs ......... . ....... l Family/friends ......... . .............. 2 COOperative Society.... ............ ...3 Bank .................................. 4 Other .............................. .5 Have you ever had experience using agric cultural credit? No (If no, skip to Question 39. ) .# Yes p; 00 you plan to continue using this same source of credit? (State reason.) No Yes Name the source(§) of'your credit What andlhow many people work for you on your farmKS)? Number Task Total a) Yourself 0 or 1 b) Hired Labor c; Wives Ed Children e) Others If you employ hired labor, on What basis db‘you selétt them (ethnicity, rate, rate, etc. )? What levels of education have you completed? (Specify school(s) Highest Level Special Course/University....l Secondary School. ..... ...... .2 Middle School................3 Primary School...............4 None... ................ ...5 Have you had any specialized training in agricdl ture? Yes No Specify Have you rec cently adapted'any new tedhniques or newlideas in agriculture? (If no. skip to Question 46. ) No Yes 44. 45. 234 Describe these new agricultural ideas and indicate the source of influence that led you to adopt it/them. Idea Description Source Tractor Fertilizer Improved Seed Weedicide/Insecticide Dams/Irrigation Tick Spray New Breed/Service Bulls Other Have you discontinued using any of these new idéas after initially adopting them? Why? No Yes FARMER PERCEPTIDNS OF PROBLEMS AND EXPERIENCE 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. What serious problems do you have with farming? (Record in order given and varify the most serious problem the interviewee feels he has.) Problem Explanation/order Planting/Weeding/Harvesting Labor Supply Credit/Money Equipment/Tools/Machinery Transportation/Marketing Water Supply Knowledge/Training Soil Fertility Other Who is responsible for solving these problemsl;' "Government"............l Scheme Management.......2 Extension Officers......3 Research/Univ. People...4 Oneself.................5 Others..................6 (Specify) .2 What should be done to solve these problems? Do you plan to cbntinue farmindl’Explain. No Yes Where have you travelddl: (Specify places and’frequency) Places Examples Frequency Outside Ghana Outside Region To Tamale To Takeradi To Kumasi To Accra Local Places 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 235 Why do (did) you normally travel to these places? Do you own a radio which works? (Ifryes, skib'to Question 54.) No ' ‘ Yes ' "‘ Do you have access to a radio which works (If no, skip to Question 55.) No. Yes What broadcasts of interest to farmersihave you heard? (Specify subjects and language of broadcast.) Do you believe that the work of thej'Schemei" has or will 2!.“ benefit you as a farmer? (Explain.) ' No Yes What dd'you believe is the most important contribution of the "Scheme“ to you and to the people of this area? Do you thihk that the "Scheme" should be contihued? Li No ‘2 Yes it Have you talked to an extension officer about your farming activities or problems? (Specify officer, extension office, nature of discussion.) No Yes SpeCifics FARMER ATTITUDES (Questions under this heading were discarded after a two-week protest, primarily because "Farmer Attitudes" is a discrete subject which would have required considerably more attention, probably as a separate topic, than there was time or resources to devote to it in this survey. APPENDIX B VARIABLES 236 F] . Number QQNO‘U‘I-th-J Code 1/6-8 1/9 1/10 1/11 1/12 1/13 1/14 1/15 1/16-17 1/18-19 1/20-21 1/22 1/23-24 1/25-26 1/27-28 1/29-30 1/31-32 1/33-34 1/35-36 1/37-38 1/39-40 1/41-42 1/43-44 1/47 1/49-50 1/52 1/53-54 1/55-56 1/57-58 1/62-64 1/65-67 1/68-69 1/70-71 1/72-73 1/74-75 1/76-77 1/78-79 2/8-9 Age 237 APPENDIX B VARIABLES Description Ga ethnic group Krobo Adangbe ethnic group Ewe ethnic group Ada Adangbe ethnic group Akan ethnic group Fulani ethnic group Other ethnic group Years resident at present residence Years experience as a farmer Tenths Room = of miles from scheme office to -armer home 1, house = 2, compound = 3 occupancy Persons in household Number Number Number of wives of wives living in household of children Number of children living in household Number Number of school age children (6 yrs. or more) of Children with at least past secondary school education Number Number of children now in secondary school of children with at least past primary school education Number Number of children now in primary or middle school of school age children with no schooling Employed by scheme: yes = 1, no = 0 Number Number Tenths Tenths Number Number Number Number Number Number Number Number Number of years worked for scheme of farms run of miles from farmer home to futhest farm of miles from farmer home to nearest farm of cattle raised of forest acres farmed of savanna acres farmed of acres of cassava farmed of maize acres farmed of yams acres farmed of sugar cane acres farmed of tomato acres farmed of other (vegetable) acres farmed Estimated number of additional acres to be planted ' _ H‘V-f .may ,. 1 2/8-9 2/11 2/12 2/13 2/14 2/15 2/16 2/17 2/18 2/19-20 2/21 2/22 2/23 2/24 2/25 2/26 2/27 2/28 2/33 2/34 2/35 2/36 2/37 2/38 2/39 2/40 2/41 2/42 2/43 2/44 2/45 2/46 2/47 2/48 2/52 238 Number of additional savanna acres of cooperative farmed Crop sales/savings = major source of capital: Yes = 1, no = 0 Animal sales = major source of capital Personal/market loans = major source of capital Bank loans - major source of capital Job wages = major source of capital Do you do food farm work yourself? yes = 1, no = 0 Do you use family labor? Number of permanent hired laborers Number of part-time hired laborers Farm Food crops? Yes = 1, no = 0 Innovation Index: Number of agricultural innovations adopted Education Index: Level of fOrmal education begun? None = 0, primary = 4, middle = 7, secondary or other advanced = 9 Advanceg specialized traiing in agricultre: yes = 1, no = . Adopted use of fertilizer; yes Adopted use of improved seed Adopted use of insecticide/weedicide Adopted use of tractor (variables discarded) Have problem with insects/rodents/other pests: yes = 1, no a 0 First problem is insects/ordents/other pests: yes = 1, no = 0 Have problem with rainfall irregularity and/or water supply First problem is rainfall irregularity and/or water supply Have problem with transportation/roads First problem is transportation/roads Have problem with animal diseases First problem is animal diseases Have problem with fertilizer scarcity First problem is fertilizer scarcity Have problem with tractor scarcity First problem is tractor scarcity Have problem with labor supply First problem is labor supply Have problem with credit/money First problem is credit/money Travel Index: Another region, Jumasi, Takoradi, Tamle, many other areas of Ghana and abroad = 7, another region, Kumasi, Takoradi, Tamale and many other areas of Ghana = 6, another region, Kumasi, Takoradi, and some other areas of Ghana 5, another region, Kumasi, some other local palces 4, another region and a few other places = 3, only traveled in this region = 2, very limited travel = l 1, no = O 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 87-98 2/54 2/55 2/57 2/58 2/59 2/60 2/61 2/62 2/63 239 Radio Index: Have own radio = 9, have access to another's radio = 5, have no access to radio = 1 Do you believe that the work of the scheme has or will benefit you as a farmer? yes = 1, no = 0 Do you believe that the scheme should continue to Operate? yes = 1, no = 0 Have you talked with an extension officer about your farming problems? yes = 1, no = 0 Impact index: number of the following experienced or perceived re scheme: (1) bought food, (2) visited, (3) observed demonstration, (4) received training, (5) -eceived extension inputs, (6) been paid employee, (7) perceive innovation adoption influence, (8) perceive benefit from scheme; range 0-8 Mode of obtaining land: stool (family) land: yes = 1, no = 0 Mode of obtaining land: chief gave permission to nonstool farmer Mode of obtaining land: purchased Mode of obtaining land: rented (variables discarded) "llllllllllllll“