PurposeThe paper aims to examine impact of adopted maize seed technology on farm profitability. It assesses both the revenue and cost implication of the adopted technology on farmers' welfare. The study aims to expand the domain of farm investment assessment analysis by including a broader range of production outcome indicators than is normally found in the adoption impact on farm profitability literature.Design/methodology/approachThe paper opted for an empirical study using field survey data. A structured questionnaire was used to interview 400 maize farmers across four regions of Ghana. The survey was complemented with focus group discussions in each region with participants representing male and female farmers cultivating maize on a commercial basis. The data captured detail household level (i.e. demographic and socioeconomic characteristics) as well as farm-level information on maize production (i.e. input use and farm output).FindingsThe paper provides empirical insights about maize farmers' perception on the adopted maize seed technology and the factors influencing adoption. It also shed light on the fact that maize farmers do not base their adoption decisions solely on farm output and revenue indicators alone, but mainly on the return on their investment and the cost associated with the maize seed technology adopted.Research limitations/implicationsBecause of data limitation, the influence of some important actors (market power) could not be directly captured in the analysis; this may lead to over simplification of a very complex situation in the maize sector. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to future investigate the influence of such important phenomenon on farm profitability.Social implicationsImproving maize productivity and farm profitability across the sectors is important in order to improve farmer income. This study, therefore, highlights the effect of adopted seed technology and its impact on farm profitability.Originality/valueThis paper fulfils an identified need to study how investment cost in maize seed technology affect farm profitability.
PurposeThere is a huge gap between actual and achievable yields of maize which threatens household food security in Ghana. Low adoption of improved maize production technologies coupled with poor compliance with Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) recommended maize production practices is identified as the cause of low yields. This study assessed farmers' compliance with CSIR recommended production practices and its effects on yield.Design/methodology/approachUsing a structured questionnaire, a cross-sectional survey of 150 respondents were interviewed for the study. Descriptive statistics, awareness and compliance indices, probit model and Garret ranking technique were the methods of analysis employed in the study.FindingsThe results showed that farmers are highly aware, have adopted and hardly comply with standards of applications of CSIR recommended production practices. Farm size, age, educational level and female gender significantly influenced compliance with recommended production practices. Also, compliance with recommended production practices increase maize yield.Originality/valuePolicies aim at addressing yield gap in maize production should be targeted at improving farmers' level of compliance with production practices by addressing some constraints through farmer credit and subsidy programmes to help farmers increase their level of compliance. The fact that farmers have adopted recommended production practices does not necessarily mean they will have higher yields. The study generates important insights about how well farmers have been adhering to standards of adoption of recommended production practices.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.