Based on a sample survey of re(settled) households differentiated by whether any member was trained or not and their proximity to the Training Centre, employing Logistic Regression, Chi-Square Test, and Descriptive Statistics, this study examined the relationship between resources and household characteristics, on the one hand, and the probability of being trained or not, on the other. This was followed by an analysis of the log odds of a farm household adopting improved fanning methods in relation to its status with respect to training, distance from the Training Centre and other social characteristics. Unlike with resources owned, there is a more systematic relationship between taking the offer of training with non-resource household characteristics - education, sex, age and the prior residence and occupation of re(settlers). Paradoxically, the probability of a more educated household head joining the course is much smaller than the less educated. Among the hypothesised household characteristics leading to the adoption of improved farming practices, whether the farmer was trained or not is the most important. This is followed by the educational level of female, run households [as actual or de facto heads in the case of migrant husbands]. The results of the logistics regression clearly established a strong and statistically significant relationship between the probability of adoption on the one hand, training and, to some extent, urban origins and prior farming occupations, on the other. Those who own more cattle and oxen are also more likely to train and adopt innovations.
Read
