CHAPTER FOUR
PRESENTATION OF RESULTS
4.1 Introduction
The study examined the influence of farmers’ knowledge of and attitudes towards the use of inorganic fertilizer for Irish potato (solanum tuberosum) production in Kabale District, Uganda. This chapter presents and discusses the findings of the study. The chapter also presents the analysis and interpretation of results. The presentations are done according to the specific objectives and hypotheses. It mainly summarizes key issues from the field, theoretical and empirical literature, compares and contrasts findings systematically and identifies any possible relationships in the process of fulfilling the overall objectives of the study.
4.2 Response Rates of respondents
Response rate (also known as completion rate or return rate in survey research) refers to the number of people who answered the survey divided by the number of people in the sample. It is usually expressed in the form of a percentage. A low response rate can give rise to sampling bias if the non- response is unequal among the participants regarding exposure and /or outcome (AAPOR, 2000). In this study, a total of 363 farmers growing Irish potatoes were reached out under a household questionnaire. The researcher also included in the study key informants, the inorganic fertilizer suppliers (04), agricultural extension workers (02) and Agricultural District Officer (01) and these were selected because they had relevant information about Irish potato production in relation to inorganic fertilizer use in the District . The study managed to access all the farmers (363) in their respective households and the key informants (07) as shown in the breakdown table below.
Table 4.1: Presents the response rates of the respondents
| Sub county of origin by farmers | Sample size | Actual response | Percentage |
| Muko | 187 | 187 | 51.4 |
| Hamurwa | 176 | 176 | 48.6 |
| Total | 363 | 363 | 100.0 |
Source: Primary Data 2016
According to Table 4.1, out of the 363 questionnaires administered in Muko and Hamurwa sub counties in Kabale District respectively. And also interview guide for 7 key informants was conducted.
4.3 Background Information of the Respondents
Respondents were asked about their age, gender, marital status, education level, duration of education and growing Irish potato and type of farm owned by Irish Potato farmers. This information was required to ensure that the sample that participated in the study had similar distribution of the respondents by characteristics to that of the population it was drawn from. This determined the accuracy and representatives of information drawn from the sample to the population. Findings regarding their age, gender, marital status, education level, duration of education and growing Irish potato, and type of farm owned by Irish Potato farmers are presented in the subsequent tables and charts.
Figure 4.1: Age of Respondents
The Figure 4.1 shows that 165 (45.5%) of respondents were aged between 41-50 years, 82 (22.6%) of respondents were aged of 51 years and above, 66 (18.2%) of respondents were aged between 31-40 years, 34 (9.4%) of respondents were aged between 21-30 years and 16 (4.4%) of respondents were aged of 20 years and below. The study findings showed that most of Irish potato farmers in Kabale District are people with a long experience in farming, like more than 20 years.
68(18.730) 0f respondents had 2-5years of farming, 202(55.65) of respondent had between 6-10years and 93 (25.62) of respondent had 10years and above.
Figure 4.2: Sex of respondents
Figure 4.2 shows that 264 (72.7%) of respondents were males while 99 (27.3%) of respondents were females. This implies that males are more involved in Irish potato production in Kabale District.
Figure 4.3: Marital status of Respondents
Figure 4.3 shows that 279 (76.9%) of respondents were married, 50 (13.5%) of respondents were single while 34 (9.4%) of respondents were widowed. This implies that most of Irish potato farmers in Kabale District are married people.
Figure 4.4: Highest level of Education achievement by respondents
Figure 4.4 shows that 280 (77.1%) of respondents had primary education, 67 (18.5%) of respondents had secondary education and 16 (4.4%) of respondents had tertiary education. The implication is that most Irish potato farmers in Kabale District had low level of education as most of them did not go beyond primary education
Table 4.2: Duration of education in years attained by Irish potato farmers
| Duration in years | Primary schooling | Secondary schooling | University schooling | Tertiary Institutions | Non-formal training | Total | ||||||
| Freq | % | Freq | % | Freq | % | Freq | % | Freq | % | Freq | % | |
| 1-2 years | 0 | 0 | 7 | 1.9 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 3.3 | 0 | 0 | 19 | 5.2 |
| 3-4 years | 7 | 1.9 | 69 | 19 | 12 | 3.3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 88 | 24.2 |
| >4 years | 231 | 63.6 | 25 | 6.9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 256 | 70.5 |
| Total | 238 | 65.6 | 101 | 27.8 | 12 | 3.3 | 12 | 3.3 | 0 | 0 | 363 | 100 |
Source: Primary Data, June 2016
The findings in Table 4.2 shows that 231 (63.6%) of respondents who had primary education spent more than 4 years in primary education, 7 (1.9%) of respondents spent between 3-4 years in primary education, 69 (19.0%) of respondents spent 3-4 years in secondary education, 25 (6.9%) of respondents spent more than 4 years in secondary education, 7 (1.9%) spent 1-2 years in secondary education, 12 (3.3%) of respondents spent 3-4 years in university education and 12 (3.3%) of respondents spent 1-2 years in tertiary institutions.
Table 4.3: Experience of farmers in growing Irish potatoes
| Time taken growing Irish potatoes in years | Frequency | Percentage |
| 1-5 years | 117 | 32.2 |
| 6-10 years | 43 | 11.8 |
| 11-15 years | 53 | 14.6 |
| 16-20 years | 32 | 8.8 |
| More than 20 | 118 | 32.5 |
| Total | 363 | 100 |
Source: Primary Data, June 2016
The Table 4.3 shows that 118 (32.5%) of respondents had more than 20 years in growing Irish potato, 117 (32.2%) of respondents had between 1-5 years in growing Irish potato, 53 (14.6%) of respondents had between 11-15 years in growing Irish potato, 43 (11.8%) of respondents had 6-10 years in growing Irish potato and 32 (8.8%) of respondents had 16-20 years in growing Irish potato.
Figure 4.5: Type of farm owned
The results in Figure 4.5 shows that 197 (54.3%) of respondents own medium size farms (0.1-0.6ha) while 166 (46.7%) of respondents own small size farms. This implies that most Irish potato farmers in Kabale District own small farms (0.1-0.5ha) and medium size of farms (0.6-1ha) which explain the amount of Inorganic fertilizers applied in Irish potato production.
4.4 Extent of Inorganic Fertilizer use in Irish Potato Production in Kabale District
This section is about the extent of inorganic fertilizer use in Irish potato production. It is in relation to the first research objective which is “to assess the extent of inorganic fertilizer usage among Irish potato farmers in Kabale District”. In order to answer the above objective, respondents were asked some questions.
Table 4.4: Responses from YES and NO questions
| Items | Responses | |||||
| YES | NO | TOTAL | ||||
| Freq. | % | Freq. | % | Freq. | % | |
| Do you use inorganic fertilizer? | 220 | 60.6 | 143 | 39.4 | 363 | 100 |
| Do you know how to apply inorganic fertilizer? | 200 | 55.1 | 163 | 44.9 | 363 | 100 |
| Would you like other farmers to use the same fertilizer? | 278 | 76.6 | 85 | 23.4 | 363 | 100 |
| Has the government played a big role in extending such fertilizer to farmers? | 95 | 26.2 | 268 | 73.8 | 363 | 100 |
Source: Primary Data, June 2016
Table 4.4 shows that 220 (60.6%) of respondents use inorganic fertilizer, 200 (55.1%) know how to apply inorganic fertilizer, 278 (76.6%) of respondents would like other farmers to use inorganic fertilizer, and 268 (73.8%) of respondents affirmed that the government did not play a big role in extending inorganic fertilizer to them.
In the perspective of inorganic fertilizer use, respondents were asked about the type of inorganic fertilizer used, the quantity used, the times inorganic fertilizer is used per season, and the duration of applying inorganic fertilizer. The findings in relation to these questions are presented in Tables 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 and 4.8
Table 4.5: Type of fertilizer used
| Type of inorganic fertilizer | Frequency | Percentage |
| NPK | 215 | 59.2 |
| Urea | 3 | 0.8 |
| DAP | 2 | 0.6 |
| Other | 0 | 0 |
| Do not use | 143 | 39.4 |
| Total | 363 | 363 |
Source: Primary Data, June 2016
The Table 4.5 shows that NPK was affirmed to be used by 215 (59.2%), Urea was affirmed to be used by 3 (0.8%), DAP was affirmed to be used 2 (0.6%), and 143(39.4%) do not use.
Table 4.6: Quantity of inorganic fertilizer used per season
| Quantity used | Frequency | Percentage |
| Above 250kgs 151-250 | 100 40 | 27.5 11.0 |
| 51-150 50kgs and below Do not use | 28 178 17 | 7.7 49.0 4.7 |
| 58.9 | ||
| Total | 363 | 100 |
Source: Primary Data
Table 4.6 shows that 178 (49.0%) of respondents use below 50kgs and below of inorganic fertilizer in Irish potato production, 100 (27.50%) of respondents use above 250kgs, 40 (11.0%) of respondents use between 151-2500kgs, and 17(4.7%) of respondents do not use. The average quantity of inorganic fertilizer used by many Irish potato farmers in Kabale District was 50kgs and below which is equal to (49.0%). This is explained by the size of farms they own and low income. Farmers with little land use little inorganic fertilizer and farmers with low income buy inorganic fertilizer they can afford.
Table 4.7: Times of applying inorganic fertilizer per season
| Times | Frequency | Percentage |
| Once | 279 | 76.8 |
| Twice | 50 | 13.8 |
| Three times | 17 | 4.7 |
| Do not use | 17 | 4.7 |
| Total | 363 | 100 |
Source: Primary Data, June 2016
Table 4.7 shows that 279 (76.8%) of respondents use inorganic fertilizer once per season. Only 50 (13.8%) of respondents use inorganic fertilizer twice per season and 17 (4.7%) of respondents use inorganic fertilizer three times per season. This implies that most of Irish potato farmers in Kabale District use inorganic fertilizers once per season. The study findings contrast with the study of Roy, Finck, Blair and Tandon (2006) which formulated the following recommendations concerning N-fertilizers and reported that split application is better. The application of inorganic fertilizer once in Irish potato production in Kabale District may be due to lack of enough financial capacity to buy inorganic fertilizer or little knowledge of applying inorganic fertilizers. These findings are in line with inconveniences to use inorganic fertilizer. The findings are presented in able 4.9 below.
Table 4.8: Period in applying inorganic fertilizer
| Period | Frequency | Percentage |
| 0-5 years | 296 | 81.5 |
| 6-10 years | 50 | 13.8 |
| Do not use | 17 | 4.7 |
| Total | 363 | 100 |
Source: Primary Data, June 2016
The results in Table 4.8 shows that the majority 296 (81.5%) of respondents applied inorganic fertilizer between 0-5 years and 50 (13.8%) of respondents applied inorganic fertilizer between 6-10 years while 17 (4.7%) of respondents did not use inorganic fertilizer. This implies that the application of inorganic fertilizer in Irish production in Kabale District is not for a long time.Table
4.9: Inconveniences in the use of inorganic fertilizer
| Inconveniences | Frequency | Percentage |
| Financial | 91 | 25.1 |
| Information | 16 | 4.4 |
| Technical | 239 | 65.8 |
| Do not use | 17 | 4.7 |
| Total | 363 | 100 |
Source: Primary Data, June 2016
Table 4.9 shows that the inconveniences in the use of inorganic fertilizer are technical 239 (65.8%) of respondents, financial constraints 91 (25.1%) of respondents and lack of information 16 (4.4%) of respondents. In the line of the study findings, the study of Kelly et al. (2001) confirmed that the most common reason of not using inorganic fertilizer in Rwanda is the lack of knowledge and the next most common is the high fertilizer prices. Also, the study findings are supported by Shiferaw, Obare and Muricho(2008) who found that there is a positive and significant difference between membership in a farmers’ association and technical efficiency (P < 0.1), suggesting that Irish potato farmers who belong to an organization are likely to benefit from better access to inputs and to information on improved farming practices. This implies that Irish potato farmers in Kabale District mostly face technical and financial challenges in the use of inorganic fertilizers.
Table 4.10: Time of applying inorganic fertilizer
| Responses | Frequency | Percentage |
| Before planting | 247 | 68 |
| During planting | 116 | 32 |
| Total | 363 | 100 |
Source: Primary Data, June 2016
The results in Table 4.10 shows that 247 (68.0%) of respondents use inorganic before planting and 116 (32.0%) of respondents use inorganic fertilizer during planting. This implies that more of Irish potato farmers in Kabale District use inorganic fertilizer before than during planting.
Table 4.11: Level of benefit for applying inorganic fertilizer
| Responses | Frequency | Percentage |
| Very high | 83 | 22.9 |
| High | 280 | 77.1 |
| Total | 363 | 100 |
Source: Primary Data, June 2016
The findings in Table 4.11 shows that the level of benefits for applying inorganic fertilizer is high 280 (77.1%) of respondents and 83 (22.9%) of respondents declared that the level of benefit for applying inorganic fertilizer is very high. The study findings concur with the results of Tolesaa and Friesen (2001) who reported that the application of 25% recommended inorganic NP fertilizers + enriched FYM resulted in the highest marginal rate of return indicating that the integrated approach can enable to save up to 75% of commercial fertilizers. This implies that the use of inorganic fertilizer in Irish potato production in Kabale District has a significant relevance.
Table 4.12: Quantity of yield per hectare by farmers
| Level | Production(Tonne/ha) | Production (Tonne/acre) |
| Farmers field with fertilizers | 7-10 | 2.8-4 |
| Farmers field without fertilizers | 3-6 | 1.2-2.4 |
Table 4.12 shows that farmers field yield with fertilizer is 7-10tonnes/ha while without fertilizer is 3-6tonnes/ha, and also shows that farmers field yield with fertilizer per acre is 2.8-4tonnes/acre while without fertilizer is 1.2-2.4tonnes/ha.
According to Kachwekano Zonal Agricultural and Research Development Institute (KAZARDI), Irish potato is grown by more than 300,000 small holder households producing a total of 800,000 tones on 112,000 hectares in Uganda.
4.4.1Testing between study variables on extent of fertilizer use and Bio-data
The study sought to establish the extent of Inorganic Fertilizer use in Irish Potato Production in Kabale District by digging deep into Cross tabulation test between study variables (of quantity of inorganic fertilizer application, type of fertilizer used, mode of fertilizer application in a season, duration of inorganic fertilizer use and the level of benefit by the farmers as a result of using inorganic fertilizers) and Bio-data (age, sex, marital status, education level and type of farm owned for the respondents). The results were presented as in the tables below
| Period of using inorganic fertilizer | Male | Female | Total |
| 0-5 years | 214 | 82 | |
| 6-10years | 33 | 17 | |
| Do not use | 17 | ||
| Total | 264 | 99 | 363 |
| Quantity of inorganic fertilizer used per season | |||
| 50kgs and below | 136 | 42 | |
| 51-100kgs | 8 | 2 | |
| 101-150kgs | 6 | 6 | |
| 151-200kgs | 7 | 7 | |
| 200kgs and below | 100 | 32 | |
| Others | 7 | 10 | |
| Total | 264 | 99 | 363 |
| Types of fertilizer used | |||
| NPK | 117 | 98 | |
| Urea | 2 | 1 | |
| DAP | 2 | ||
| Do not use | 143 | ||
| Total | 264 | 99 | 363 |
| Times of fertilizer use per season | |||
| Once | 180 | 99 | |
| Twice | 50 | ||
| Three times | 17 | ||
| Do not use | 17 | ||
| Total | 264 | 99 | 363 |
| Level of benefit for applying inorganic fertilizer | |||
| Very high | 66 | 17 | |
| High | 198 | 82 | |
| Total | 264 | 99 | 363 |
| Period of using inorganic fertilizer | Single | Married | Widowed | Total |
| 0-5years | 50 | 212 | 34 | |
| 6-10years | 50 | 0 | ||
| Do not use | 17 | |||
| Total | 50 | 279 | 34 | 363 |
| Quantity of inorganic fertilizer used per season | ||||
| 50kgs and below | 20 | 138 | 20 | |
| 51-100kgs | 2 | 5 | 3 | |
| 101-150kgs | 4 | 3 | 5 | |
| 151-200kgs | 5 | 5 | 4 | |
| 200kgs and above | 13 | 119 | ||
| Others | 6 | 9 | 2 | |
| Total | 50 | 279 | 34 | 363 |
| Type Fertilizer used | ||||
| NPK | 33 | 148 | 34 | |
| Urea | 2 | |||
| DAP | 3 | |||
| Do not use | 15 | 128 | ||
| Total | 50 | 279 | 34 | 363 |
| Times of fertilizer use per season | ||||
| Once | 50 | 195 | 34 | |
| Twice | 50 | |||
| Three times | 17 | |||
| Do not use | 17 | |||
| Total | 50 | 279 | 34 | 363 |
| Level of benefit for applying inorganic fertilizer | ||||
| Very high | 17 | 66 | ||
| High | 33 | 213 | 34 | |
| Total | 50 | 279 | 34 |
| Period of using inorganic fertilizer | Age 20 and below | 21-30 | 31-40 | 41-50 | 51 and above | Total |
| 0-5years | 16 | 17 | 49 | 132 | 82 | |
| 6-10years | 0 | 17 | 17 | 16 | ||
| Other | 17 | |||||
| Total | 16 | 34 | 66 | 165 | 82 | 363 |
| Quantity of inorganic fertilizer used per season | ||||||
| 50kgs and below | 4 | 12 | 45 | 100 | 17 | |
| 51-100kgs | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | ||
| 101-150 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | |
| 151-200kgs | 3 | 6 | 4 | 1 | ||
| 200 and above | 3 | 7 | 10 | 54 | 58 | |
| Others | 2 | 2 | 7 | 6 | ||
| Total | 16 | 34 | 66 | 165 | 82 | 363 |
| Type of fertilizer used | ||||||
| NPK | 16 | 34 | 40 | 45 | 80 | |
| Urea | 3 | |||||
| DAP | 2 | |||||
| Do not use | 26 | 117 | ||||
| Total | 16 | 34 | 66 | 165 | 82 | 363 |
| Times of fertilizer use per season | ||||||
| Once | 16 | 34 | 49 | 98 | 82 | |
| Twice | 0 | 0 | 17 | 33 | 0 | |
| Three times | 0 | 0 | 0 | 17 | 0 | |
| Do not use | 17 | |||||
| Total | 16 | 34 | 66 | 165 | 82 | 363 |
| * Level of benefit for applying inorganic fertilizer | ||||||
| Very high | 0 | 34 | 16 | 17 | 16 | |
| High | 16 | 0 | 50 | 148 | 66 | |
| Total | 16 | 34 | 66 | 165 | 82 | 363 |
| Period of using inorganic fertilizer | Type of farm owned Small size | Medium size | ||
| 0-5years | 166 | 130 | ||
| 6-10years | 0 | 50 | ||
| Others | 17 | |||
| Total | 166 | 197 | 363 | |
| Quantity of inorganic fertilizer used per season | ||||
| 50kgs and below | 98 | 80 | ||
| 51-100kgs | 4 | 6 | ||
| 101-150kgs | 7 | 5 | ||
| 151-200kgs | 8 | 6 | ||
| 200kgs and above | 43 | 89 | ||
| Others | 6 | 11 | ||
| Total | 166 | 197 | 367 | |
| Type of fertilizer used | ||||
| NPK | 121 | 94 | ||
| Urea | 3 | |||
| DAP | 2 | |||
| Do not use | 45 | 98 | ||
| Total | 166 | 197 | 363 | |
| Times of fertilizer use per season | ||||
| Once | 123 | 156 | ||
| Twice | 28 | 22 | ||
| Three times | 7 | 10 | ||
| Do not use | 8 | 9 | ||
| Total | 166 | 197 | 363 | |
| * Level of benefit for applying inorganic fertilizer | ||||
| Very high | 66 | 17 | ||
| High | 100 | 180 | ||
| Total | 166 | 197 | 363 |
Table 4.18: Further analysis on the extent of inorganic fertilizer use
| Variables | Category | Frequency | Percentage |
| Do you use inorganic fertilizers? | Yes | 220 | 60.61 |
| No | 143 | 39.39 | |
| Do you know how to apply of inorganic fertilizers? | Yes | 200 | 55.10 |
| No | 163 | 44.90 | |
| Time of application of inorganic fertilizers | Before planting | 247 | 68.0 |
| During planting | 116 | 32.0 | |
| After planting | 00 | 0.00 | |
| Inconveniences during the use of inorganic fertilizers | Financial constraints | 91 | 25.1 |
| Information | 16 | 4.4 | |
| Technical | 239 | 65.8 | |
| No inconvenience | 17 | 4.7 | |
| Would you recommend the fertilizers for use by other farmers? | Yes | 278 | 76.58 |
| No | 85 | 23.42 | |
| Govt’s role in extending fertilizer to farmers? | Yes | 95 | 26.2 |
| No | 268 | 73.8 |
Source: Primary Data 2016
Table 4.18 shows that 220 (60.6%) of respondents use inorganic fertilizer, 200 (55.1%) know how to apply inorganic fertilizer, 278 (76.6%) of respondents would like other farmers to use inorganic fertilizer, and 268 (73.8%) of respondents affirmed that the government did not play a big role in extending inorganic fertilizers to the farmers there by providing extension workers to train and sensitize households on the usage, applicability, effectiveness, timing and the amount of inorganic fertilizer use in especially Irish potato production.
The table also shows that the inconveniences in the use of inorganic fertilizers are technical 239 (65.8%) of respondents, financial constraints 91 (25.1%) of respondents and lack of information 16 (4.4%) of respondents. Regarding the timing of inorganic fertilizers, results showed that 247 (68.0%) of respondents use inorganic before planting and 116 (32.0%) of respondents use inorganic fertilizer during planting. This implies that more of Irish potato farmers in Kabale District use inorganic fertilizer before than during planting.
4.5 Farmers’ Knowledge of inorganic Fertilizer use in Irish Potato Production in Kabale District
4.5.1. Factor analysis: farmers’ knowledge
Farmers’ knowledge was looked at in terms of mode of application of inorganic fertilizers, effectiveness of inorganic fertilizer application, amount of inorganic fertilizer application and sources of information regarding inorganic fertilizers
Table 4.19: Factor analysis of Farmers’ Knowledge of inorganic Fertilizer application
Source: Primary Data 2016
An initial analysis was done to obtain eigen values of each component in the data set. In the table above, four components and eigenvalues over kaiser’s criterion of (4.602, 4.023, 3.612 and 3.212) and in combination explained 74.974% of the variance. The table further shows the factor loadings after rotation which corresponds to the four components or factors which include mode of application of inorganic fertilizers, effectiveness of inorganic fertilizer application, amount of inorganic fertilizer application and sources of information regarding inorganic fertilizers. These factor loadings are clustered for each of the factors with respect to the measures, ie, questions in the questionnaire. Each cluster of the factor loadings shows that there is an attribute that measures farmers’ knowledge.
In order to exploit the above objective, the researcher wanted to know respondents’ understanding of inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production. A category of key informants gave two points of views on inorganic fertilizer use in Irish potato production and these were the positive point of view; “that inorganic fertilizer use in Irish potato production is a strategy to increase soil nutrients and soil fertility in order to increase yields and Irish potato production”, thus referring inorganic fertilizers as minerals used to improve soil fertility in order to increase Irish potato production. The other point of view was that, “inorganic fertilizer use in Irish potato production is a way to reduce yields and Irish potato production”. Further, a section of key informants think that inorganic fertilizer use in Irish potato production is harmful to human beings.
4.5.3 Findings about mode of application of inorganic fertilizers, effectiveness of inorganic fertilizer application, amount of inorganic fertilizer application and Irish potato production.
The study sought to establish the relationship between mode of application of inorganic fertilizers, effectiveness of inorganic fertilizer application, amount of inorganic fertilizer application and Irish potato production.
The study looked at the relationship between variables which were categorical in nature (mode of application of inorganic fertilizers, effectiveness of inorganic fertilizer application, amount of inorganic fertilizer application and Irish potato yield) thus analysis of the association through computation of the Pearson correlation was done and thereafter, a comparison of probability values using co relational tables to find out the interval nature of the data and the need to test the nature and direction of the relationship was done.
Table 4.20: Relationship between the variables and production of Irish potatoes
| Mode of inorganic fertilizer application | Effectiveness of inorganic fertilizer usage | Amount of inorganic fertilizer application | Irish potato yield | ||
| Mode of inorganic fertilizer application | Pearson Correlation | 1 | .780(**) | .939(**) | .868(**) |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | .000 | .000 | .000 | ||
| N | 363 | 363 | 363 | 363 | |
| Effectiveness of inorganic fertilizer usage | Pearson Correlation | .780(**) | 1 | .857(**) | .684(**) |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | .000 | .000 | .000 | ||
| N | 363 | 363 | 363 | 363 | |
| Amount of inorganic fertilizer application | Pearson Correlation | .939(**) | .857(**) | 1 | .890(**) |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | .000 | .000 | .000 | ||
| N | 363 | 363 | 363 | 363 | |
| Irish potato yield | Pearson Correlation | .868(**) | .684(**) | .890(**) | 1 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | .000 | .000 | .000 | ||
| N | 363 | 363 | 363 | 363 |
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
Source: Primary Data 2016
The relationship between mode of application of inorganic fertilizers and Irish potato yield.
From the correlation Table 4.20, there is a positive relationship between mode of application of inorganic fertilizers and Irish potato yield. (r=.868**, p-value<0.01)
The relationship between effectiveness of application of inorganic fertilizers and Irish potato yield.
From the correlation Table 4.20, there is a positive relationship between effectiveness of application of inorganic fertilizers and Irish potato yield. (r=.684**, p-value<0.01)
The relationship between amount of inorganic fertilizers and Irish potato yield.
From the correlation Table 4.20, there is a positive relationship between amount of inorganic fertilizers and Irish potato yield. (r=.890**, p-value<0.01)
Table 4.21: Distribution of farmers’ knowledge of inorganic fertilizer usage by farm size
| Size of Farm owned by Farmer | |||||
| Knowledge level (% correct answered) | Overall | Marginal | Small | Medium | Large |
| Low (<60%) | 20.16 | 22.64 | 10.71 | 6.25 | 8.88 |
| Moderate (60-80%) | 40.31 | 37.74 | 53.57 | 43.75 | 34.11 |
| High (>80%) | 39.53 | 39.62 | 35.71 | 50.00 | 57.01 |
| Total | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 | 100.00 |
Source: Primary Data 2016
The distribution of farmers’ knowledge of inorganic fertilizer application in the table above indicated that, overall, nearly half of the respondents (40.31%) had a moderate level of knowledge, 39.53% had a high level of knowledge and 20.16% had a low level of knowledge. More than half the farmers of large farms (57.01%) had a high level of knowledge about inorganic fertilizer use in Irish potato production, as did half of the farmers of medium-sized farms (50%) and nearly half the farmers of marginal farms (39.62%). More than half of the farmers of small farms (53.57%) had a moderate level of knowledge about inorganic fertilizer usage. Interestingly, farmers of larger farms were more knowledgeable about inorganic fertilizer usage than farmers on smaller farms.
Table 4.22: Determinants of inorganic fertilizer application in Irish Potato production
| Parameters | Frequency (n= ) | Percent |
| Timing of inorganic fertilizer application | ||
| Once | 298 | 82.1 |
| Twice | 48 | 13.2 |
| Thrice | 17 | 4.7 |
| Factors influencing effectiveness of fertilizer usage | ||
| Type of soil | 82 | 22.59 |
| Weather conditions | 12 | 3.31 |
| Time used | 28 | 7.71 |
| Quantity used | 49 | 13.50 |
| Method of application | 119 | 32.78 |
| Quality of inorganic fertilizer | 73 | 20.11 |
| Factors influencing amount of fertilizer usage | ||
| Type of soil | 24 | 6.61 |
| Soil structure | 39 | 10.74 |
| Quality of fertilizer | 57 | 15.70 |
| Size of land | 41 | 11.29 |
| Level of farmer’s knowledge | 109 | 30.03 |
| Level of income | 93 | 25.62 |
Source: Primary Data 2016
The results revealed that the majority 298 (82.1%) of respondents apply inorganic fertilizers in Irish potato production once per season, 48 (13.2%) of respondents apply inorganic fertilizers in Irish production twice per season and 17 (4.7%) of respondents apply inorganic fertilizers in Irish potato production three times per season. The application of inorganic fertilizers in Irish potato production once per season may be explained by the economic capacity of Irish potato farmers, low knowledge on the application of Irish potato and inaccessibility to inorganic fertilizers.
Results further revealed that factors influencing the effectiveness of inorganic fertilizer use in Irish potato production include but not limited to the quantity of inorganic fertilizers used represented by 49 (13.50%) of the total respondents, the time of fertilizer application 28 (7.71%) of the respondents, the type soil 82 (22.59%) of the respondents, weather conditions 12 (3.31%) of the respondents, the quality of inorganic fertilizers 73 (20.11%) of the respondents and method of inorganic fertilizer application represented by 119 (32.78%) of the total 363 respondents targeted for the study.
Regarding factors influencing the amount of inorganic fertilizer application in Irish potato production, findings revealed the following key factors; quality of inorganic fertilizers 57 (15.70%) of respondents, level of income 93 (25.62%) of respondents, soil structure 39 (10.74%) of respondents, type of soil 24 (6.61%) of respondents, size of land 41 (11.29%) of respondents and level of farmers’ knowledge 109 (30.03%) of respondents. In line with the study findings, Lawal and Ayoola (2008) found that the use of inorganic fertilizer improves soil structure, and has positive effect on biotic factors and nutrient supply. This shows the importance of applying inorganic fertilizer in Irish potato production.
4.6. The Influence of farmers’ attitudes towards inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production
The fourth objective of the study was to examine the Influence of farmers’ attitudes towards inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production. The respondents were requested to respond to a number of statements regarding farmers’ attitudes in Kabale District by indicating their agreement using a five-point Likert scale of 1=Strongly Disagreed(SD), 2=Disagreed(D), 3= Not decided(N), 4=Agreed(A) and 5=Strongly Agreed(SA) as shown in Table 4. The responses are summarized in the table below;
Table 4.23: Results of attitudes of farmers towards inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production
| ITEMS | M | SD | D | NS | A | SA |
| Inorganic fertilizers are cheaply priced | 3.2 | 52 | 47 | 73 | 159 | 32 |
| 14.30% | 12.90% | 20.10% | 43.80% | 8.80% | ||
| Irish potato farmers commonly use urea | 3.23 | 35 | 60 | 79 | 165 | 24 |
| 9.60% | 16.50% | 21.80% | 45.50% | 6.60% | ||
| Most of the farmers like to use broadcasting methods of fertilizers application | 3.55 | 28 | 37 | 74 | 156 | 68 |
| 7.70% | 10.20% | 20.40% | 43.00% | 18.70% | ||
| The rate of fertilizer application among Irish potato farmers is high | 3.23 | 44 | 53 | 74 | 159 | 33 |
| 12.10% | 14.60% | 20.40% | 43.80% | 9.10% | ||
| Inorganic fertilizers are highly nutritious | 3.26 | 33 | 60 | 74 | 172 | 24 |
| 9.10% | 16.50% | 20.40% | 47.40% | 6.60% | ||
| Inorganic fertilizer application enable Irish potatoes to grow well | 3.26 | 29 | 58 | 96 | 148 | 32 |
| 8.00% | 16.00% | 26.40% | 40.80% | 8.80% | ||
| Inorganic fertilizer application increases the level of production | 3.34 | 37 | 37 | 81 | 180 | 28 |
| 10.20% | 10.20% | 22.30% | 49.60% | 7.70% | ||
| Inorganic fertilizer are easily accessed by Irish potato farmers | 3.28 | 43 | 37 | 90 | 161 | 32 |
| 11.80% | 10.20% | 24.80% | 44.40% | 8.80% | ||
| Inorganic fertilizer application required skills labor | 3.27 | 44 | 37 | 91 | 160 | 31 |
| 12.10% | 10.20% | 25.10% | 44.10% | 8.50% | ||
| N.P.K is less used by Irish potato farmers | 3.22 | 55 | 38 | 75 | 163 | 32 |
| 15.20% | 10.50% | 20.70% | 44.90% | 8.80% | ||
| Most of these inorganic fertilizers are poisonous to human being | 3.19 | 49 | 46 | 78 | 166 | 24 |
| 13.50% | 12.70% | 21.5 | 45.70% | 6.60% | ||
| Some inorganic fertilizers retard plant growth | 3.35 | 44 | 38 | 76 | 157 | 48 |
| 12.10% | 10.50% | 20.90% | 43.30% | 13.20% | ||
| Excessive application of inorganic fertilizers can damage the soil | 3.23 | 44 | 53 | 74 | 159 | 33 |
| 12.10% | 14.60% | 20.40% | 43.80% | 9.10% | ||
| Inorganic fertilizers are used by only large scale Irish potato farmers | 3.2 | 48 | 50 | 69 | 172 | 24 |
| 13.20% | 13.80% | 19.00% | 47.40% | 6.60% | ||
| Inorganic fertilizer application requires technical skills | 3.26 | 29 | 58 | 96 | 148 | 32 |
| 8.00% | 16.00% | 26.40% | 40.80% | 8.80% | ||
| Inorganic fertilizer improve soil fertility | 3.2 | 53 | 38 | 80 | 168 | 24 |
| 14.60% | 10.50% | 22.00% | 46.30% | 6.60% | ||
| Inorganic fertilizers increases the production of Irish potatoes | 3.17 | 56 | 39 | 86 | 150 | 32 |
| 15.40% | 10.70% | 23.70% | 41.30% | 8.80% | ||
| Inorganic fertilizers reduces the quality of Irish potatoes | 3.19 | 57 | 33 | 82 | 165 | 26 |
| 15.70% | 9.10% | 22.60% | 45.50% | 7.20% | ||
| Inorganic fertilizers increases the growth rate of Irish potatoes | 3.24 | 45 | 41 | 80 | 166 | 26 |
| 12.40% | 11.30% | 22.00% | 45.70% | 7.20% | ||
| Some inorganic fertilizers encourage weed development | 3.08 | 69 | 37 | 77 | 165 | 11 |
| 19.00% | 10.20% | 21.20% | 45.20% | 3.00% | ||
| AVERAGE MEAN | 3.25 | 11.7 | 11.87 | 21.1 | 44.6 | 8.5 |
Source: Primary Data 2016
To analyze the findings, farmers who strongly disagreed had a mean of 11.7, those who disagreed had a mean of 11.87, those who neither agreed nor disagreed had a mean of 21.1, those who agreed had a mean of 44.6 and those who strong agreed had a mean of 8. The study findings in the Table above shows that farmers’ attitude is moderately positive (aggregate mean=3.25).. The study findings concur with Pfiffner and Pretshus (1997) who stated that farmers’ attitude are more likely to correspond with their behavior and in most cases, attitudes influence a broad range of behaviors. Indeed, an individual’s reaction to any stimulus in any situation depends on the perception and personality of the individual. Also, Abdoulaye and Sanders (2005) argued that the financial liquidity constraint is often cited as an important determinant of fertilizer use.This explained that socio-economic conditions of farmers influence the application of inorganic fertilizer in Irish potato production in Kabale District.
4.6.1 Testing the Influence of farmers’ attitudes towards inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production
In order to determine the Influence of farmers’ attitudes towards inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production, correlation and regression analysis were conducted. Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was used to determine the strength of the relationship between farmers’ attitudes on inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production. The coefficient of determination was used to determine the effect of farmers’ attitudes towards inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production. The significance of the coefficient (p) was used to test the objective by comparing p to the critical significance level at 0.05. This procedure was applied in testing the other objectives and thus, a lengthy introduction is not repeated in the subsequent sections of the testing.
Table 4.24: Relationship between farmers’ attitudes and inorganic fertilizer usage
| Farmers’ attitude | Inorganic fertilizer usage | ||
| Farmers’ attitude | Pearson Correlation | 1 | .417(*) |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | .025 | ||
| N | 363 | 363 | |
| Inorganic fertilizer usage | Pearson Correlation | .417(*) | 1 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | .025 | ||
| N | 363 | 363 |
Source: Primary Data 2016
Hypothesis:
Ho: There is no significant relationship between farmers’ attitudes and inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production
H1: There is a significant relationship between farmers’ attitudes and inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production
According to the results in Table 25, farmers’ attitudes and inorganic fertilizer use were found to have a significant positive relationship (r=0.417, p<0.05).Thus, the hypothesis that stated that farmers’ attitudes would have a significant influence on inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production in Kabale District is partially accepted. This means that farmers’ attitude has a positive effect on inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production in Kabale District . This practically implies that inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production improves with positive farmers’ attitudes.
In order to determine the extent to which farmers’ attitudes influences inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production in Kabale District, the regression analysis was conducted. The results are summarized in the Table 4.25.
Table 4.25: Regression Analysis showing the influence of farmers’ attitudes on inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production in Kabale District
| Model | Standardized Coefficients | T | Sig. |
| Beta | B | Std. Error | |
| 1 | 6.741 | .000 | |
| farmers’ attitudes | .241 | 2.420 | .016 |
| R Square=0.611 | |||
Source: Primary Data 2016
According to the results in the summarized Table above, findings show that farmers’ attitudes significantly affects inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production in Kabale District (r = .241). This means that farmers’ attitude is a significant determinant of inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production in Kabale District . Since the correlation does imply a causal-effect as stated in the fourth objective, the coefficient of determination, which is a square of the correlation coefficient (R square = .611), was computed and expressed as a percentage to determine the variance in inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production in Kabale District due to farmers’ attitudes. Thus, findings show that farmers’ attitudes accounted for 61.1% variance in inorganic fertilizer use for Irish potato production.
These findings were also subjected to a test of significance (p) and it is shown that the significance of the correlation (p = .016) is less than the recommended critical significance at 0.05. This means that farmers’ attitude has a positive significant effect on inorganic fertilizer usage for Irish Potato production. This practically implies that inorganic fertilizer usage for Irish Potato production improves with a positive farmers’ attitude.
4.6.3 Model fit
The tables below gives the overall model summary for the study variables (farmers’ attitude, farmers’ knowledge, socio-economic factors and inorganic fertilizer usage)
Table 4.26: Model summary for farmers’ attitude, farmers’ knowledge, socio-economic factors and inorganic fertilizer usage
| Model | R | R Square | Adjusted R Square | Std. Error of the Estimate |
| 1 | .741(a) | .897 | .035 | .874 |
a Predictors: (Constant), farmers’ attitude, farmers’ knowledge, socio-economic factors
Source: Primary Data 2016
The table above provides the values of R and R square for the model that was derived for the farmers’ attitude, farmers’ knowledge, socio-economic factors and inorganic fertilizer usage (R=0.741, R2 =0.897). The R value represents a simple correlation between farmers’ attitude, farmers’ knowledge, socio-economic factors and inorganic fertilizer usage. The value of R2 =0.897 shows that farmers’ attitude, farmers’ knowledge and socio-economic factors account for almost 90% of the variations in inorganic fertilizer usage.
4.7 Influence of socio-economic factors on the use of Inorganic fertilizer for Irish Potato Production in Kabale District
Data for the study were collected through structured interview schedule containing several sections, each comprising multiple statements with different units of measurement. To obtain a quantitative measure of the respondents on the socio-economic factors affecting the use of inorganic fertilizers on Irish Potato Production, a list of possible factors was compiled and made available, and respondents were asked to rate the factors.
Table 4.27: Socio-economic factors in regard to inorganic fertilizer usage
| Characteristics | Category | Frequency (n= ) | Percentage |
| Accessibility to Inorganic fertilizers | Yes | 260 | 71.6 |
| No | 103 | 28.4 | |
| Rating of Price of inorganic fertilizers | Very expensive | 26 | 7.20 |
| Expensive | 320 | 88.20 | |
| Worth | 16 | 4.40 | |
| Cheap | 00 | 0.00 | |
| Very cheap | 00 | 0.00 | |
| Price of inorganic fertilizers | 2000-2500 | 184 | 50.7 |
| 2500-3000 | 156 | 43.0 | |
| 3000-3500 | 01 | 0.30 | |
| 3500-4000 | 01 | 0.30 | |
| More than 4000 | 17 | 4.70 | |
| Perception on the price | High | 312 | 86.00 |
| Accessible | 48 | 13.20 |
Source: Primary Data 2016
The results in table above shows that 320 (88.2%) of respondents affirmed that the price of inorganic fertilizer is expensive, 26 (7.2%) of respondents said that the price is very expensive and only 16 (4.4%) of respondents said that the price of inorganic fertilizer is worth. This indicates that the price of inorganic fertilizer in Kabale District is expensive which influence its use in Irish potato production.
Results also suggest that 184 (50.7%) of respondents supported that 1kg of inorganic fertilizer is between 2000-2500Ush and 156 (43.0%) of respondents affirmed that 1kg of inorganic fertilizer is between 2500-3000Ush. This implies that 1kg of inorganic fertilizer varies from 2000-3000Ush in Kabale District . Therefore, the table4.5.3 below showed that 312 (86.0%) of respondents declared that the price of inorganic fertilizer is high while only 48 (13.2%) of respondents declared that the price of inorganic fertilizer is accessible. This explains the low level of application of inorganic fertilizer in Irish potato production in Kabale District.
Furthermore, 260 (71.6%) of respondents supported that it is easy to access to inorganic fertilizers, and 103 (28.6) affirmed that it is hard to access inorganic fertilizers. This implies that the accessibility of inorganic fertilizer by Irish potato farmers is not a great hindrance to the application of inorganic fertilizer in Irish potato production in Kabale District
4.7.1 Effect of Socio-economic Variables on Inorganic fertilizer usage
Multiple regression analysis was used to predict the effect of selected socioeconomic variables (independent variables) on inorganic fertilizer usage in Irish production in Kabale District . The selected predictors were; Rating of Price of inorganic fertilizers, X1(very expensive, expensive, worth, cheap and very cheap), Price of inorganic fertilizers, X2 (2,000-2,500, 2500-3000, 3000-3500, 3500-4000 and more than 4000 Ugandan shillings), price perception, X3(High, Accessible and low) and then accessibility to inorganic fertilizers,X4 (yes and no). The data were fitted and tried in four functional forms of linear, exponential, semi-log and double-log. Output of double-log was chosen, since, it gave the best result in terms of signs, magnitudes, and significant parameter estimates
Table 4.28: Multiple regression results for the effect of selected socio-economic variables on inorganic fertilizers
| Variable | Regression coefficient | t-value | Sig |
| Constant | 11.578 | 0.715 | 0.423 |
| X1 | 3.795 | 0.307 | 0.000 |
| X2 | -0.391 | -0.567 | 0.001 |
| X3 | 0.461 | 0.307 | 0.002 |
| X4 | 0.578 | 0.239 | 0.037 |
R2 = .85. F-value = 12.356, 5% level of significance
Source: Primary Data 2016
Out of the four socio-economic variables considered as independent variables, three were found to positively influence the farmer’s use of inorganic fertilizers in the study area and these were: Rating of Price of inorganic fertilizers X1; price perception X3; and, then accessibility to inorganic fertilizers, X4. The estimated co-efficient of X2 (price of inorganic fertilizers) was negatively correlated with the usage of inorganic fertilizers by farmers. The negative relationship implies that an increase in this variable (price of inorganic fertilizers) will decrease farmers’ usage of inorganic fertilizers and ultimately impact on the production of Irish potatoes in Kabale District.
The output of the regression analysis showed an R2 of 0.85. This implies that about 85% of the variation in the inorganic fertilizer usage by respondents was accounted for by joint actions of the four independent variables. The high value of R2 observed is an indication that the explanatory socioeconomic variables were sufficient to explain the variations in fertilizer use in Irish potato production, while the remaining 15% was as a result of non-inclusion of some other explanatory variables, errors in estimation, as well as other factors outside the study. This implies that the indicators considered were relevant socio-economic variables that influenced inorganic fertilizer use in the area. The overall result was found to be statistically significant, as F-static value of 12.356 was significant at a 5% level of significance. Also the Durbin-Watson value of 1.728 which lies within the bench mark of 2.0 indicated an absence of autocorrelation among the factors considered.
4.7.2: Source of Information on inorganic fertilizers
The researcher further analyzed particular sources of information regarding inorganic fertilizers to farmers in Kabale District and how relevant or significant they are in regard to the use and application of inorganic fertilizers in Irish potatoes in Kabale District .
Table 4.29: Distribution of respondents according to information sources
| Information source | Frequency | Percentage |
| Radio | 20 | 5.51 |
| Television | 05 | 1.39 |
| Extension agents | 62 | 17.08 |
| Fellow farmers | 98 | 26.99 |
| Farmers’ organization | 79 | 21.76 |
| Fertilizer marketers | 41 | 11.29 |
| Text messages | 58 | 15.98 |
| Total | 363 | 100 |
Source: Primary Data 2016
The results as presented in the Table shows that only 17.08% of the respondents learned of application of inorganic fertilizer farming practices through extension agents while majority 82.92% learned of them from other sources, indicating a gap in extension service delivery system which could be addressed through intensified efforts of extension agents. However, Nenna (2011) observed that extension services bear great potential for improving the productivity of natural resources, promoting the right attitude among natural resource managers. The service is recognized as an essential mechanism for information delivery and advice as input, into modern resource management. It could also be deduced from the table below that fellow farmers (26.99%) played a very important role in the dissemination of useful and practical information to the audience on the application of inorganic fertilizers to improve production and productivity of Irish Potatoes in Kabale District.
4.7.3Constraints to Application of Inorganic fertilizers
Farmers were asked to indicate their most important barriers to the application of inorganic fertilizers in farming practices. The priority barriers as perceived by farmers were summarized as presented in Table 4.4 and can be categorized into production, marketing and distribution, institutional and attitudinal.
Table 4.30: Ranking of constraints to application of inorganic farming practices
| Category | Statements | Weighted mean | Interpretation |
| Production | High cost of fertilizer | 4.00 | Strongly Agree |
| Increases cost of production | 3.82 | Agree | |
| Capacity to apply the recommended quantities | 3.77 | Agree | |
| Difficulties with unfavorable climate and weather | 2.83 | Agree | |
| Increases pest and diseases of crop | 2.74 | Agree | |
| Increases weed manifestation | 2.70 | Agree | |
| Affects quality of produce | 2.67 | Agree | |
| Having no knowledge by farmers | 1.15 | Disagree | |
| Inappropriate methods of application | 1.13 | Disagree | |
| Marketing and distribution | Unavailability of fertilizer | 3.86 | Agree |
| Lack of efficient marketing and distribution system | 2.95 | Agree | |
| Inadequate supply of fertilizer | 2.83 | Agree | |
| Limited access to credit | 4.00 | Strongly agree | |
| Unavailability of fertilize | 3.86 | Agree | |
| Institutional | Lack of extension agents | 3.83 | Agree |
| Poor education and information | 3.75 | Agree | |
| Lack of support by government | 2.85 | Agree | |
| Poor water harvesting techniques | 2.71 | Agree | |
| Lack of appropriate national farm input policy | 2.58 | Agree | |
| Attitude | Middlemen buy at low prices | 3.77 | Agree |
| Middlemen sell at high prices | 3.63 | Agree | |
| Consumers are reluctant to pay | 3.10 | Agree | |
| Not willing to cultivate | 0.88 | Strongly disagree |
Source: Primary Data 2016
The results show that high cost of fertilizer (x=4.00) was ranked as the highest in the list of barriers with respect to crop production activities. The second in the rank was increase in cost of production (X = 3.82).
Considering the marketing and distribution barriers, unavailability of fertilizer (X = 3.86) was the most important barriers from farmers’ point of view. As seen in Table 4.4, with respect to institutional barriers, limited access to credit and finance (X = 4.00) was the most important barriers cited by the farmers. Also of all the variables considered lack of credit and high cost of fertilizer were at the top of the list as indicated by the farmers. These results corroborate the findings of Kelly (2006) and Akpan (2012)
The information in table 26 indicate that the major constraining factor which was attitudinal was that middlemen buy produce at low prices, and sell at high prices. This attitude inhibits the moral of the farmers to increase their production and maximize the necessary profits. This could be attributed to the fact that the farmers battle with sun in its nakedness and rains in their intensity while the middlemen, without any labor are enjoying the gains of their sweat.
