Zero budget natural farming: A comparative study of farmers' socioeconomic contexts

Abstract

The present study on the socio-economic profile of farmers was conducted in two districts of Northern Karnataka. Respondents were categorized into planners, adopters, and non-adopters, with 25 respondents from each category in each district, resulting in a total of 150 farmers being studied. An ex-post-facto research design was adopted for this study.The study reveals that 60.00 percent of planners and 42.00 percent of adopters were middle-aged, while 38.00 percent of non-adopters were young. In terms of education, 40.00 percent of planners, 28.00 percent of adopters, and 30.00 percent of non-adopters had completed senior secondary school. Regarding land holdings and herd size, 30.00 percent of planners, 32.00 percent of adopters, and 44.00 percent of non-adopters had semi-medium land holdings, with most planners (70.00%) and non-adopters (66.00%) having small herds, while 70.00 percent of adopters had medium-sized herds. About half of the planners and adopters, and 44 percent of non-adopters, had medium farming experience. A significant majority of planners (66.00%), adopters (70.00%), and non-adopters (56.00%) had farming as their sole occupation. Most planners (62.00%), adopters (68.00%), and non-adopters (68.00%) had medium annual incomes. Social participation was high among 48 percent of planners, low among 46.00 percent of adopters, and medium for 50.00 percent of non-adopters. Extension participation was medium for 58.00 percent of planners, with 34.00 percent of adopters having medium and high participation, and 44.00 percent of non-adopters having low and medium participation. In terms of extension contact, 56.00 percent of planners had medium levels, while half of the adopters and non-adopters had high and medium levels, respectively. Low mass media exposure was noted among 40.00 percent of planners, 42.00 percent of adopters, and 62.00 percent of non-adopters. Lastly, half of the planners had medium innovativeness, 46.00 percent of adopters were highly innovative, and 54.00 percent of non-adopters had low innovativeness.