Understanding the intention to adopt artificial insemination technology in pig by tribal farmers

PH ROMEN SHARMA; MAHAK SINGH; PANKAJ KUMAR SINHA; BAGISH KUMAR; R TALLI MOLLIER; D J RAJKHOWA

doi:10.56093/ijans.v91i6.115443

Authors

PH ROMEN SHARMA ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Nagaland Centre, Medziphema, Nagaland 797 106 India
MAHAK SINGH ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Nagaland Centre, Medziphema, Nagaland 797 106 India
PANKAJ KUMAR SINHA ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Nagaland Centre, Medziphema, Nagaland 797 106 India
BAGISH KUMAR ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Nagaland Centre, Medziphema, Nagaland 797 106 India
R TALLI MOLLIER ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Nagaland Centre, Medziphema, Nagaland 797 106 India
D J RAJKHOWA ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region, Nagaland Centre, Medziphema, Nagaland 797 106 India

https://doi.org/10.56093/ijans.v91i6.115443

Keywords:

Adoption, Artificial insemination, Perceived behavioural control, Pig, Theory of planned behaviour, Tribal farmers

Abstract

The study used Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) to understand the underlying factors for the intention to adopt artificial insemination (AI) technology in pig by the tribal farmers of Nagaland. Responses from a survey of 72 tribal farmers of Nagaland revealed a strong intent to adopt artificial insemination in pig which is driven by strong favourable attitude towards the technology and strong approval from referent groups for the artificial insemination in pig. Perceived behavioural control seems to be the main discriminating drivers among the theory of planned behaviour constructs for the intention to adopt artificial insemination in pig, and are affected by farming context especially distance to artificial insemination provider centre. Farmer's intention to start for pig breeding also positively affects the intention to adopt the technology.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ajzen I and Madden J T. 1986. Prediction of goal-related behaviour: attitudes, intentions, and perceived behavioural control. Journal of Experimental Psychology 22: 453–74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(86)90045-4

Ajzen I.1991. The theory of planned behaviour. Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes 50(2): 179–211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Deka R P, Bayan B and Padmakumar V. 2018. Baseline study on impact assessment of artificial insemination in pigs in Nagaland. ILRI Project Report. Nairobi, Kenya: ILRI. Retrieved from https://www.ilri.org/publications/baselinestudy-impact-assessment-artificial-insemination-pigsnagaland.

Deka R, Thrope W, Lapar M L and Kumar A. 2007. Assam’s pig subsector: current status, constraints and opportunities. Nairobi (Kenya): ILRI. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10568/1690.

de Leeuw A, Valois P, Ajzen I and Schmidt P. 2015. Using the theory of planned behaviour to identify key beliefs underlying pro-environmental behaviour in high-school students: Implications for educational interventions. Journal of Environmental Psychology 42: 128–38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.03.005

Francis J J, Johnston M, Eccles M P, Grimshaw J and Kaner E F. 2004. Measurement issues in the theory of planned behaviour: A supplement to the manual for constructing questionnaires based on the theory of planned behaviour. Newcastle: Centre for Health Services Research.

Hair J F, Black W C, Babin B J, Anderson R E and Tatham R L. 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis. Prentice Hall, New Jersey. Hansson H, Ferguson R and Olofsson C. 2012. Psychological constructs underlying farmers’ decisions to diversify or specialise their businesses – An application of theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Agricultural Economics 63: 465–82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-9552.2012.00344.x

Kadirvel G, Bujarbaruah K M, Kumar S and Ngachan S V. 2017. Oestrus synchronization with fixed-time artificial insemination in smallholder pig production systems in north-east India: Success rate and benefits. South African Journal of Animal Science 47(2): 140–45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4314/sajas.v47i2.5

Kadirvel G, Kumaresan A, Das A, Bujarbaruah K M, Venkatasubramanian V and Ngachan S V. 2013. Artificial insemination of pigs reared under smallholder production system in northeastern India: Success rate, genetic improvement, and monetary benefit. Tropical Animal Health and Production 45(1): 679–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-012-0277-z

Knox R V. 2016. Artificial insemination in pigs today. Theriogenology 85(1): 83–93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2015.07.009

Lemke U, Kaufmann B, Thuy L T, Emrich K and Valle Zárate A. 2006. Evaluation of smallholder pig production systems in North Vietnam: Pig production management and pig performances. Livestock Science 105(1–3): 229–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2006.06.012

Maes D, Nauwynck H, Rijsselaere T, Mateusen B, Vyt Ph, de Kruif A and Van Soom A. 2008. Diseases in swine transmitted by artificial insemination: An overview. Theriogenology 70(8): 1337–45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.06.018

MartinovskaStojcheska A, Kotevska A, Bogdanov N and Nikoliæ A. 2016. How do farmers respond to rural development policy challenges? Evidence from Macedonia, Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Land Use Policy 59: 71–83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.08.019

Oparinde A, Abdoulaye T, Mignouna D B and Bamire A S. 2017. Will farmers intend to cultivate Provitamin A genetically modified (GM) cassava in Nigeria? Evidence from a k-means segmentation analysis of beliefs and attitudes. PLoS ONE 12(7): e0179427. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179427

Patra M K, Kent Y, Rungsung S, Ngullie L, Nakhro R and Deka B C. 2014. Performance appraisal of artificial insemination technique in pig under organized farm and field condition in Nagaland. Indian Research Journal of Extension Education 14(4): 55–60.

Rogers E M. 2003. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press.

Whittemore C. 1993. The Science and Practice of Pig Production. Longman Group, UK.