agriculture development through online (web based) agro advisory system in rwanda
TRANSCRIPT
REPUBLIC OF RWANDA
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION
HIGHER INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURE AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY
FACULTY OF AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND AGRIBUSINESS
Presented by:
Gildas NIYIGENA
Dissertation submitted for the partial fulfilment
of the requirements for the Award of a Bachelor’s Degree (Ao) in
Rural Development and Agribusiness
Supervisor: Jean de Dieu MIRUKIRO (MBA)
Co-supervisor: Elias RURANGWA (MSc)
Academic year, 2012-2013
AGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENT THROUGH ONLINE
(WEB BASED) AGRO-ADVISORY SYSTEM IN RWANDA
“CASE STUDY: Mukarange and Gacurabwenge Sectors, and Abashirikabute
and Imisugi cooperatives”
[i]
DECLARATION
I, Gildas NIYIGENA, declare that this memoir is the result of my own work and all sources or
materials used for it have been appropriately acknowledged. This was carried out under the
supervision of Jean de Dieu MIRUKIRO and Elias RURANGWA. In addition, I declare that
this memoir has not been submitted to any other institutions anywhere for the award of
any academic degree, diploma, or certificate.
Gildas NIYIGENA ____________________ ____________________
Candidate Signature Date
Jean de Dieu MIRUKIRO (MBA) ____________________ ____________________
Supervisor Signature Date
Elias RURANGWA (MSc) ____________________ ____________________
Co-supervisor Signature Date
[ii]
DEDICATION
To Almighty God
To my beloved parents,
To my brothers and sisters,
To my friends and classmates
[iii]
AKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost I thank God, for blessings, guidance and protection through my whole life and
studies.
My thanks are addressed to the Higher Institute of Agriculture and Animal Husbandry (ISAE),
especially the Rural Development and Agri-Business department, which contributed more at the
accomplishment of this work.
I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to my supervisor Mr. Jean de Dieu MIRUKIRO
(MBA), I felt so happy with his guidance and academic advice, and I am thankful to my co-
supervisor Mr. Elias KARANGWA (MSc) for application development technical assistance; I
am very much grateful for all their support and willingness to advise me to successfully finalize
the memoir.
My sincere aknowledgement goes to the local leader, to farmers and field technicians from
Sectors (Gacurabwenge and Mukarange) and cooperatives (Abashirikabute and Imisugi) we
visited, for their collaboration and from whom we got information for this dissertation.
I would like to thank the Rwanda Agricultural Board (RAB), especially its Agricultural
Extension Department, for their suggerstion and pieces of advice, and to its field technical team
which helped me to reach the farmers’ cooperatives.
And for their experiences shared and special advices, I thank, the Agricultural Information and
Communication Centre (CICA) especially its Library department.
Last, but not the least, I acknowledge all of my classmates, friends and relatives for their direct
or indirect help for the accomplishment of this work.
May God bless them all!
NIYIGENA Gildas
[iv]
ABSTRACT
This study entitled “Agriculture Development through Online (Web based) Agro-Advisory
System in Rwanda” analyses the applicability of Extension Services, using the online tools in
Rwanda, for the development of agricultural sector; by assessing the previous challenges and
opportunities in whole country based on areas considered for the present study.
The research was undertaken in three different Districts, where the researcher visited two Sectors
(for individual farmers meeting) and two Sectors (for farmers operating in cooperatives). The
sites’ choice was basing on a random sampling, for getting three different Provinces on the
Rwandan territory.
For the research to be consistent, it was based on primary data, from the survey conducted
among 60 farmers, and interviews between the researcher and 2 extension agents and with 2
institutions’ experts acting in extensions services; also on secondary data from different
documents and reports by previous researchers and authors.
Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected and analyzed using software such as SPSS
and MS Excel. Also designing (Photoshop) and web development (Dreamweaver, JetBrain…)
software has been used during this research, for the accomplishment of an online application.
Results shows that, the agricultural information needs (mostly made of seeds/livestock improved
varieties, mechanization, diseases/pests prevention and cure, products’ markets, etc.) and
delivery among different agricultural stakeholders, and the awareness and use of different ICT
tools: 91.7%, 90%, 23.3% use Radio, telephone and TV respectively, and the agricultural
information spread through these tool is used by 16.7% of respondents. 89% of respondents
affirmed to know about internet, 56.7% are aware of infrastructures to access web tools in their
regions, but only 8.3% uses internet.
From the relatively high willingness to adopt these tools, where 90% of respondents liked the
new extension mode and wish it to be implemented, results from analysis and discussion with
several actors in extension services among others governmental institutions (RAB and CICA),
sectorial agronomists and farmers from visited sites, was elaborated a web application to show
how can be applied the online agro-advisory services in Rwanda, building a network for a
community of different stakeholders.
[v]
Furthermore, from this research’s findings, we concluded that, the information reaching the
farmers is not sufficient and addition needs include farming and animal breeding techniques,
inputs’ and products’ markets, environmental protection,…, and this by means of traditional flow
of information (discussion between colleague farmers), meeting and ICT extension from private
and public institutions (RAB, REMA,RIAM, etc.) Even if the awareness to web tools and ICT
extension is still low, the web based extension is applicable for agriculture development in
Rwanda. A typical system of online extension system was elaborated to show how this can be
achieved. And recommendations addressing to government for supporting academic research, to
research institutions for helping in the implementation and publication of research findings, to
other agriculture actors for sharing agriculture information to anyone in need and finally to other
researchers to develop more techniques of how ICT tools can help to the development of
agricultural sector, were suggested.
[vi]
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION ............................................................................................................................. i
DEDICATION ................................................................................................................................ ii
AKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................................................ iii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... vi
LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... ix
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ x
LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................................................ xi
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABREVIATIONS ........................................................................ xii
CHAPTER 1: GENERAL INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 1
1.1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Background of the study ................................................................................................... 2
1.3. Problem statement ............................................................................................................ 3
1.4. Objectives ......................................................................................................................... 4
1.4.1. General objectives ..................................................................................................... 4
1.4.2. Specific objectives .................................................................................................... 4
1.5. Research Questions .......................................................................................................... 5
1.6. Significance of the study ................................................................................................... 5
1.7. Scope and limitation of the study ..................................................................................... 5
1.8. Organization of the study ................................................................................................. 6
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................ 7
2.1. Extension and Technology adoption ................................................................................ 7
2.1.1. Extension Definition ................................................................................................. 7
2.1.2. Extension after Technology adoption ....................................................................... 7
2.1.3. Impact evaluation ...................................................................................................... 7
2.1.4. Agricultural knowledge and information system ...................................................... 9
2.1.5. Nature of agriculture information ........................................................................... 11
2.1.6. Agriculture information dissemination ................................................................... 12
2.1.7. Actors in the agriculture information ...................................................................... 13
2.2. ICT and Agriculture ....................................................................................................... 13
[vii]
2.2.1. Agricultural transformation .................................................................................... 14
2.3. Rwanda Extension System and ICT ................................................................................ 14
2.3.1. Overview of Rwanda ICT enabling Agricultural advisory and Assistance system 14
2.3.2. Actors in the Rwanda agriculture domain .............................................................. 16
2.3.3. ICT and Agriculture Extension in Rwanda ............................................................. 18
2.4. Online Agriculture Extension Service ............................................................................ 19
2.4.1. Online service ......................................................................................................... 19
2.4.2. Types of Services .................................................................................................... 19
2.4.3. Why web based? ..................................................................................................... 20
2.4.5. Advantages of Web based over traditional Extension ............................................ 21
2.4.6. Advantages of Web based extension over Mobile extension ................................. 22
2.4.7. Components, functions and processes of Cyber extension system ......................... 22
2.4.8. Opportunity and Constraints for web based system ............................................... 24
2.4.9. Successful examples of ICT enabled extension systems ........................................ 25
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .......................................................................... 27
3.1. Research design/plan ..................................................................................................... 27
3.1.1. Targeted population ................................................................................................ 27
3.1.2. Sampling procedures and sample size (Respondents sorting) ................................ 28
3.1.3. Study area................................................................................................................ 31
3.2. Methods of data collection ............................................................................................. 34
3.2.1. Tools for primary data collection ............................................................................ 34
3.2.2. Secondary Data collection (Documentation) .......................................................... 36
3.3. Web Application development and design ..................................................................... 36
3.3.1. Analysis and Research ............................................................................................ 36
3.3.2. User centric information architecture ..................................................................... 36
3.3.3. Web Application development and design ............................................................. 37
3.3.4. Testing..................................................................................................................... 38
3.3.5. Deployment ............................................................................................................. 38
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................ 40
4.1. Description of respondents ............................................................................................ 40
4.2. Farmers .......................................................................................................................... 41
[viii]
4.2.1. Farmers’ characteristics .......................................................................................... 41
4.2.2. Agricultural activities and practices ........................................................................ 42
4.2.3. Agricultural information sufficiency ...................................................................... 47
4.2.4. Information needs ................................................................................................... 51
4.2.5. Awareness and access to web technologies and information ................................. 54
4.2.6. Use and access to ICT extension information......................................................... 57
4.2.7. Reception of web (cyber) extension mode in Rwanda ........................................... 59
4.3. Extension agents ............................................................................................................. 61
4.4. Extension institutions in Rwanda ................................................................................... 63
4.5. Rwanda Online Agro-Advisory System .......................................................................... 66
4.5.1. Target users ............................................................................................................. 66
4.5.2. Mission .................................................................................................................... 66
4.5.3. Diffusion means ...................................................................................................... 67
4.5.4. Members ................................................................................................................. 67
4.5.5. Features and design ................................................................................................. 69
4.5.6. System contribution to the extension services ........................................................ 75
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................. 77
5.1. Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 77
5.2. Recommendations........................................................................................................... 79
REFERENCE ................................................................................................................................ 81
APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................. 85
[ix]
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Types of agricultural Information Transferred though Extension .................................. 12
Table 2: Overview of sites (Districts) for the case studies ........................................................... 32
Table 3: On field agricultural and institutional actors visited during this research ...................... 40
Table 4: Land holding size for farmer respondents ...................................................................... 46
Table 5: Training sufficiency ........................................................................................................ 50
Table 6: Difference assessment in information needs among different farmers .......................... 53
Table 7: Respondent farmers’ awareness to ICT .......................................................................... 55
Table 8: Respondent farmers’ awareness of Internet .................................................................... 55
Table 9: Respondent’s use of internet ........................................................................................... 57
Table 10: ICT Extension awareness and usage to respondent farmers ......................................... 58
Table 11: Reception and suggestion to the cyber extension from farmer respondents ................ 60
Table 12: Different features and member types with their roles (or actions) on ROAAS system 74
[x]
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Tools of knowledge and information management in agriculture ................................ 11
Figure 2: Community telecentre in Kayonza District ................................................................... 19
Figure 3: Stages of the Agricultural Production Process and Information Needs ........................ 21
Figure 4: Web-based Services Model for Agriculture Extension ................................................. 24
Figure 5: Process in Web application development and designing .............................................. 39
Figure 6: Respondent farmers' characteristics .............................................................................. 42
Figure 7: Activities distribution among respondents .................................................................... 43
Figure 8: Practices distribution for farming .................................................................................. 44
Figure 9: Practices distribution for livestock ................................................................................ 44
Figure 10: Number of farmers who benefited from trainings ....................................................... 47
Figure 11: Agricultural information got by respondents through trainings .................................. 48
Figure 12: Impact of agricultural trainings (from trained respondents) ....................................... 50
Figure 13: Agricultural information accessed to by farmer .......................................................... 51
Figure 14: Training needs among farmer respondents ................................................................. 52
Figure 15: Respondents access to telecentres ............................................................................... 56
Figure 16: Communication tools used by respondents ................................................................. 57
Figure 17: ICT extension services known by respondents who are aware of ICT extension
services .......................................................................................................................................... 59
Figure 18: Information flow in ROAAS ....................................................................................... 73
[xi]
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix I: Mayor Actors in Agriculture Extension System and their Channels of Delivery .... 85
Appendix II: Independent Samples T-Test (Between Farmers' categories) ................................. 86
Appendix III: Independent Samples T-Test (Within Farmers' categories, Cooperatives) ............ 86
Appendix IV: Independent Samples T-Test (Within Farmers' categories, Individuals) ............... 87
Appendix V: Questionnaire I (System’s needs for farmers) ......................................................... 88
Appendix VI: Questionnaire II (System’s needs for technicians) ................................................ 90
Appendix VII: Interview with the institutions' experts ................................................................. 91
Appendix VIII: Rwanda Administrative Stratification ................................................................. 92
Appendix IX: Indices for sampling Plan ...................................................................................... 94
[xii]
LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABREVIATIONS
%: percent
AKIS: Agricultural Knowledge and Information System
AKST: Agricultural Knowledge and Science Technologies
AMIS: Agricultural Management Information System
ASARECA: Association for Strengthening Agriculture Research for East and Central Africa
BDC: Business Development Centre
BTC: Cooperation Technique Belge (Belgische Technishe Cooperatie)
CCI: Centre Communautaire d’Information
CGIAR: Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research
CIALCA: Consortium for Improving Agriculture based Livelihood in Central Africa
CIAT-TSBF: International Center for Tropical Agriculture- Tropical Soil Biology and Fertility
CICA: Centre d’Information et de Communication Agricole
CIP: Crop Intensification Program
CIP: Crop International Program
CRS: Catholic Relief Services
CSS: Cascading Style Sheet
DDP: Dairy Development Project
DFID: Department for International Development
DRDRE: Department of Regional Development, Research and Extension (MINALOC)
DUHAMIC-ADRI: Duharanire Amajyambere y’Icyaro
E.U: European Union
[xiii]
EAV: Ecole Agro-Veterinaire
ECABREN: Eastern and Central Africa Bean Research Network
EDPRS: Economic Development and Poverty Reduction Strategy
FAO: Food and Agricultural Organization
FARA: Forum for Agricultural Research for Africa
FFS: Farmer Field School
FTP: File Transfer Protocol
GDP: Gross Domestic Product
GIS: Geographic Information System
GNP (PPP): Gross National Income using Purchasing Power Parity rate
GoR: Government of Rwanda
ha: Hactar
HTML: Hypertext Markup Language
ICRAF: International Centre for Research in Agroforestry / World Agroforestry Centre
ICT: Information and Communication Technology
ICT4D: Information and Communication Technology for Development
IFAD: International Fund for Agricultural Development
IFDC: International Fertilizer Development Center
IITA: International Institute for Tropical Agriculture
IM: Instant Messaging
INATEK: Institute of agriculture, Technology and Education of Kibungo
[xiv]
IP: Internet Protocol
IRRI: International Rice Research Institute
ISAE: Institut Superieur d’Agriculture et d’Elevage
JAICA: Japan International Cooperative Agency
KWAMP: Kirehe community-based Watershed Management Project
LUC: Land Use Consolidation program
LWH: Land Husbandry, Water Harvesting and Hillside Irrigation
MINAGRI: Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources
MINALOC: Ministry of Local Government
MINICT: Ministry of ICT
MINIRENA: Ministry of Natural Resources
NEPAD: New Partnership for Africa’s Development
NGO(s): Non-Governmental Organization(s)
NICI III: National ICT Strategy and Plan III (2011-2015)
NUR: National University of Rwanda
PAPSTA: Support Project for the Strategic Plan for the Transformation of Agriculture
PHP: Hypertext preprocessor
PM: Personal Messaging
PPP: Public Private Partnership
PRAPACE: Programme Regionale d’amélioration de la Pomme de terre et de la Patate douce en
Afrique Centrale et de l’Est.
PRICE: Project for Rural Income through Exports
[xv]
PSF: Private Sector Federation
PSTA: Strategic Plan for the Transformation of Agriculture in Rwanda
RAB: Rwanda Agricultural Board
RCA: Rwanda Cooperative Agency
RDB: Rwanda Development Board
REMA: Rwanda Environmental Management Agency
RIAM: Rwanda Institute of Administration and Management
RITA: Rwanda Information Technology Authority
ROAAS: Rwanda Online Agro-Advisory System
RSSP: Rural Sector Support Project
RWARRI: Rwanda Rural Rehabilitation Initiative
RWF: Rwandan Francs
SMS: Sort Message Services
SPIU: Simple Project Implementation Unit
SPSS: Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
sq.km: Square kilometer
UNDP: United Nations Development Programme
US$: US Dollars
USAID: United States Agency for International Development
WVI: World Vision International
www: World Wide Web
[1]
CHAPTER 1: GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.1. Introduction
Worldwide the agricultural sector is faced with several serious challenges: the spiralling demand
for food, declining cultivated area due to population pressure, declining agriculture productivity
due to the natural resource degradation, and increasing competion in internation markets. One
fundamental element in meeting these challenges is the adoption of improved agriculture
production and market techniques and technologies by farmers and other rural enterpreneurs.
This transition from a resource-based to a technology-based system of agriculture, howerver,
places greater responsibility on the agriculture extension sector, since it is a vital conduit of new
agricultural information and technologies to farmers as well as a conduit back to researchers and
policy-makers of farmer’s problems, needs and concerns.
These works are assured through the efforts of different institutions which play a major role in
the agricutural extension sector, in particular, the public, private (agro-processing and market
firms, input suppliers, farmer associations and consulting or “fee-for-service” firms), non profit
organizations (commodity founations, universities and researchers), government parastatals
(commodity boards), and non governmental organizations (Umali, et al., 1994 p. 3), in
accordances to the national policies and strategies of hosting countries.
That is why, Rwanda, as a developing country, by building the technical and organizational
capacity of farmers (MINECOFIN, 2007 p. i) is encouraging and empowering sustainable
agricultural development projects in general, and especially the extension domain; and this
through not only Ministry and other public institutions involved in agriculture activities, but also
in pair with private sector and NGOs fitting in the domain; and by means of new technologies
among others ICT tools.
[2]
1.2. Background of the study
According to Wikipedia.org, the GNI PPP of US$1,240 per capita in 2011 makes Rwanda the
166th on the “List of Countries by GNI (PPP) per capita”, and as is the case for many countries in
this range, its development is mainly based on agriculture practices. And as pointed in Rwanda
Economic Update 2011 (World-Bank, 2011 p. vi), agriculture sector grew at an average of 4.9
percent over the five years before. Now it is contributing to the overall Gross Domestic
Production (GDP) at a rate of 33% in 2012 (gov.rw); the sector occupies 79.5 percent of the
labor force and generates 45.0 percent of the country export revenue.
According to the MINECOFIN (Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning) budget in 2008
expenditure for agriculture including investments for Agriculture represented about 5.3% of the
national budget corresponding to about 25 billion of Rwf. According to the same document “In
line with the crops intensification policy, a large amount of the funds was used for the
importation of fertilizer as well as for the purchase of improved seeds for the farmers to improve
productivity”. (Cantore, 2011 p. 8)
In order to sustain the productivity some challenges have to be addressed among others: (i)
Reducing dependency on rain-fed agriculture through greater use of different models of
irrigation; (ii) Better erosion control and integrated soil fertility management; (iii) Diversifying
agriculture production, in particular agricultural export goods, for example in areas of
horticulture and flowers, (iv) Changing the skills profile of people employed in agriculture, to
foster the creation of increased agricultural off-farm employment such as agro-processing and
other value chain activities, as agriculture is the primary source of employment with more than
two-thirds of the entire working population and 86.5 percent of rural population, was employed
in the agriculture sector, and (v) Developing a market-based food crop distribution system to
contribute to country-wide food security (World-Bank, 2011 p. vii).
In addition to the efforts for enhancing and improving the agriculture sector, one should not
overlook the relevance of spreading the information timely and efficiently to all stakeholders
involved in agriculture namely farmers, technicians that assists farmers on a daily basis, the
government and other private stakeholders.
[3]
The aforementioned issues that would be done to develop the agricultural sector are likely to
succeed through extension services by different ways. Obviously, this could have a great positive
impact on the agriculture production.
Among these forms of extension models, a newly and more progressive one is the one using
Information and Communication Technology. This one uses the mobile phones by voice call and
SMS, the use of Medias like radio and television broadcast, and finally the e-learning, use of
internet for sharing information by video, audio and different articles.
Fortunately, the ICT led agriculture is welcomed in Rwanda, through our national good policies
which promote science, technology and innovation for economic growth (i.e. EDPRS 2008-
2012).
For the present work, the research was conducted in different regions of Rwanda
(Gacurabwenge, Mukarange, Bumbogo and Kinyinya Sectors) and different institutions involved
in agriculture development were visited in order to assess what extent information and assistance
are needed and can be provided through ICT models and especially web-based platform.
The assessment of the present conditions in agriculture sector in Rwanda inspired the researcher
to elaborate; -as it was expected this could be one of solutions- a website to allow online
information exchange among different actors and stakeholders in the agricultural domain
(Government and private institutions and boards, local and international NGOs, service
providers, market suppliers, researchers and field technicians, and finally associations and
individual farmers).
1.3. Problem statement
As the current agricultural information is spread by public and private actors, trainings, meeting
and other traditional ways of communication to farmers and other agricultural stakeholders in
Rwanda, agriculture extension services have got some weaknesses. Among the weaknesses one
can list the following: it takes a long time to provide and to get trainings in normal forms (where
trainer and the trainee(s) meet physically in the same location for exchanging a face to face
dialogue); Sometimes, extension information is expensive (in addition to the fees for getting
[4]
extension services, some groups of farmers can hire an expert on their own); The quality of
information is questionable: (i) Information can be erroneous because it is transmitted from
mouth to mouth among different agents, (ii) No judgment can be done on the technicians’ views
because they act being one or a few number who are available at one site. (iii) The information
can be easily lost by loss of document (hard copies) and other records, and finally, it is difficult
to make comparison with other regions’ data, because most of the time the records are not shared
and stay in the in the region where they have been recorded (ifad.org, 1995-2013).
The present study seeks to provide a solution to the aforementioned weaknesses in terms of
agriculture extension services by designing a website that will allow Online Advisory and
Assistance Service to anyone participating in agricultural domain.
1.4. Objectives
1.4.1. General objectives
This study aimed to investigate which challenges are encountered in agricultural extension
services and whether these can be resolved by use of ICT tools in general and especially web-
based online advisory platform.
1.4.2. Specific objectives
Specific objectives were:
- To assess the current extension information sufficiency and access to agricultural
stakeholders in Rwanda, from case studies.
- To know the agricultural information needed by Rwandan farmers and other agricultural
stakeholders and way of getting it.
- To evaluate the agricultural stakeholders’ awareness and access to web technologies in
Rwanda.
- To assess the use and access to ICT extension information in Rwanda.
- To know whether the web based extension system can be applied in Rwanda.
- To build an online web application to help in agricultural extension services in Rwanda.
[5]
1.5. Research Questions
This research were conducted in accordance to a number of questions met in agriculture
extension domain in Rwanda, and for which, we tried to find solutions where possible or made
recommendation to the competent institutions. These questions are following:
- What extensions services do agricultural stakeholder have access to, and how sufficient is
the information?
- What types of information do agricultural stakeholders in general and especially farmers
need for increasing their agricultural production and productivity in Rwanda, and from
whom may it come?
- How much are web technologies known and used by our agricultural stakeholders?
- How much and what type of ICT extension modes are used in Rwanda?
- Is the new web extension system welcomed?
- In case it is welcomed, is it going to be applied successfully?
1.6. Significance of the study
Many actors may act in harmony to develop agriculture sector where small and medium farmers,
agriculture extension agents, cooperatives of farmers, researchers, mentors, service providers,
public and private institutions, NGOs and government are working together and all their efforts
aiming at improving farmer’s livelihood and at the same time the country’s GDP. This can be
achieved through different ways including field extension and online or ICT based advisory
system. Our study focused on agricultural online advisory and assistance in order to reduce the
gap present in this mode of extension that constitutes one of powerful initiatives for developing
rural areas.
1.7. Scope and limitation of the study
As the current research was assessing how online (web-based) tools can contribute to the
Rwanda agriculture development, due to the limited time and means, it was conducted on 4
different sites of Rwanda: to the individual farmers households (Gacurabwenge Sector in South
Province, Mukarange Sector in Eastern Province) and farmers’ cooperatives (Nduba and
[6]
Kinyinya Sectors in Kigali City). And we visited RAB and CICA, as some of government
institutions and actors/stakeholders in agriculture extension. The field survey was conducted
from February to March 2013 whereas the institutions’ visit was made by end March 2013, and
the collected data concerned with the information needs to the asked farmers in agriculture
extension domain, for the previous time.
1.8. Organization of the study
The present dissertation is organized into five chapters. Chapter one introduces the situation
generally and especially the background in Rwanda, states the problem statement, research
objectives, research questions, significance of the study, and the study scope and limitations.
Chapter two covers the review of the related literature that includes conceptual explanation of the
contribution of online and mainly web-based tools to the agricultural development. Chapter three
presents the research design, area, methodology that used to carry out this research. Chapter four
is the central theme or core of this paper, where data are presented, analyzed, interpreted and
discussed, and where we explain the functions and use of the created application. Finally, chapter
five comprises conclusions and recommendations of the findings.
[7]
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
The following section describes the technical terms related to this subject under study within this
research. Some definition and a set of reviews used to explain this study, and some explanation
the flow, different actors and type of agricultural information are discussed; where also the
online mode of extension, the main object of this research, is described. All these are studied, in
general using examples, and a case of Rwanda was mentioned particularly.
2.1. Extension and Technology adoption
2.1.1. Extension Definition
The Extension services (also known as agriculture advisory services) refers to the range of
information, advice, training and knowledge related to agriculture or livestock production,
process and marketing, provided by the government, NGOs, and other source that increase
farmers’ ability to improve their productivity and income. Delivery may take the form of
individual or group visits, organized meetings, use of information and communication
technologies (ICTs), or teaching through the use of demonstration plots, model farms, or farmer
field schools (FFSs) (Meinzen-Dick, et al., 2011 p. 62).
2.1.2. Extension after Technology adoption
Development, testing, and diffusion of new technologies are emphasized in order to ensure
continuous innovation and growth of the agricultural sector as well as to promote resilience and
adaptation to changing agro-ecological environment. The problem of low productivity on
smallholder farms is not much the lack of agricultural technologies but rather of inadequate
knowledge, skills and resources (inputs such as fertilizer, labor, equipment, seeds and water) to
enable them to adopt efficiently and utilize existing technologies to enhance production and
earning from farming (UNDP-Ethiopia, 2011 p. 6).
2.1.3. Impact evaluation
Impact assessments are essential to assess the impact of new agricultural technologies on a
variety of outcomes (household, social and intellectual development).
[8]
Two key components of a good impact evaluation study are: (i) The availability of accurate
baseline information and a properly thought-out control group, allowing before-after and with-
without comparisons. Comparing the beneficiary group before and after the intervention or
comparing differences between the beneficiary group and another group that did not receive the
intervention is necessary as a control for external factors that are likely to contaminate the
evaluation results.
Involving the evaluation team at the earliest stages of project design is the most suitable way of
ensuring a proper and accurate evaluation without the need for more complicated statistical
techniques -although statistical techniques (such as propensity score matching) can be used ex
post to address some of these issues. If data are available on both beneficiary and comparison
groups at two points in time, it is feasible to use “difference-in-difference” analysis, which allows
the evaluator to eliminate the influence of unobservable characteristics that might affect impact
as long as these characteristics do not change over time (Meinzen-Dick, et al., 2011 p. 45).
𝑦 = 𝛽0 + 𝛽1𝑑𝐵 + 𝛿0𝑑2 + 𝛿1𝑑2 ∙ 𝑑𝐵 + 𝑢
Where y is the outcome of interest, d2 is a dummy variable for the second time period. The
dummy variable dB captures possible differences between the treatment and control groups prior
to the policy change. The time period dummy, d2, captures aggregate factors that would cause
changes in y even in the absence of a policy change. The coefficient of interest, δ1, multiplies the
interaction term, d2 • dB which is the same as a dummy variable equal to one for those
observations in the treatment group in the second period. The difference-in-differences estimate
is 𝛿1 = (𝑦𝐵,2
− 𝑦𝐵,1
) − (𝑦𝐴,2
− 𝑦𝐴,1
). (May, et al., 2007 p. 1)
(ii) Another way to evaluate the impact of a technique adoption is the “information score”.
Information scores for each component of the farmers' agricultural information system are
calculated by multiplying the weights of information contact with degree of information
usefulness. Total Information Score is formulated as: 𝑇𝐼𝑆𝑖𝑗 = 𝐹𝐶𝑖𝑗 × 𝐼𝑈𝑖𝑗
Where FC is the number of contact with information sources for the i-th farm and IU is the
usefulness of information for the i-th farm (Demiryurek, et al.).
[9]
2.1.4. Agricultural knowledge and information system
A system is a group of interacting components, operating together for a common purpose
(Spedding 1988). According to Checkland (1981) a system is a model of an entity. It is
characterized in terms of its hierarchical structure, emergent properties, communication and
control. The term subsystem is equivalent to system, contained within a larger system.
The system approach is a way of looking at an entity and dealing with problems in order to
identify and improve the particular system. It can be applied to any subject (Spedding 1988). The
system approach has also shown a high potential for offering a conceptual framework to analyze,
manage and improve a current system and to design a better one (Cavallo 1982). Models of
social system can be used as a tool for analyzing the information requirements of actors involved
in a system (Checkland & Holwell 1998).
In general system theory, an information system is accepted as a system, automated or manual,
that comprises people, machines, and/or methods organized to collect, process, transmit, and
disseminate data which represent information Ciborra (2002: 5) proposes that information
systems "deal with the deployment of information technology in organizations, institutions, and
society at large". Thus information systems are also social systems whose behavior is heavily
influenced by the goals, values and beliefs of individuals and groups, as well as the performance
of the technology (Angel & Smithson 1991).
Processed information becomes knowledge when an individual knows (understands) and
evaluates it. Thus, a knowledge system is more individualized and emphasizes personal cognition
(Demiryurek 2000). However, groups of people may share a common knowledge system such as
an indigenous knowledge system (Brokensha et al. 1980). Wilson (2000) clearly defines
information behavior as "the totality of human behavior in relation to sources and channels of
information, including both active and passive information seeking, and information use. Thus, it
includes face-to-face communication with others, as well as the passive reception of information
as in, for example, watching TV advertisements, without any intention to act on the information
given".
[10]
Röling defends the usefulness of the system approach to analyze agricultural information and
defines an agricultural information system as “a system in which agricultural information is
generated, transformed, consolidated, received and fed back” to underpin knowledge utilization
by agricultural producers(1988: 33).
Accordingly, an agricultural information system consists of components (subsystems),
information related processes (generation, transformation, storage, retrieval, integration,
diffusion and utilization), system mechanisms (interfaces and networks) and system operations
(control and management). In addition, the analysis of the agricultural information system in a
specific farming system may provide the identification of basic components and structure of the
system, the different sources of information used by different components in the system, the
understanding of how successfully the system works and how to improve system performance
(system management) (Demiryurek 2000). This approach is also useful to identify possible
defaults and improve the coordination between components (i.e. information management).
(Demiryurek, et al.)
Agricultural information and knowledge created from different sources is stored in various forms
before it is disseminated for use. The main repositories of such knowledge include publications,
audio visuals, and websites. The stored knowledge and information is then disseminated to users,
such as rural farmers, through intermediaries notably during trainings, field visits, exhibitions,
publications, and using traditional forms of ICT (TV and radio), modern forms of ICT (internet,
mobile phone, etc.), and others (UNDP-Ethiopia, 2011 p. 17).
[11]
Figure 1: Tools of knowledge and information management in agriculture
Source: (UNDP-Ethiopia, 2011 p. 18)
2.1.5. Nature of agriculture information
Agricultural information transmitted to and from farmers via the agricultural extension system
can be classified into two broad groups: pure agriculture information and agricultural
information inherently tied to new physical inventions (Table 1).
Pure agriculture information refers to any information which can be used without the acquisition
of a specific technology. It includes all types of self-standing advice on practices in four main
areas: (i) cultural and production techniques (e.g. timing of land preparation, planting and
harvesting, optional input use, animal husbandry and livestock health, crop protection, and farm
building and design), (ii) farm management (e.g. record keeping, farm budgeting, financial and
organizational management, and issues), (iii) marketing and processing information (e.g. prices,
market options, storage procedures, packaging techniques, transport, and international standards
for quality and phyto-sanitary requirements); and (iv) community development (e.g. the
organization of farmers’ associations).
[12]
Agricultural inventions or technologies generally come in the form of: (i) inputs to farm
production (e.g. new agricultural machinery, agricultural chemicals, seeds, livestock breeds, and
livestock supplest and pharmaceuticals); (ii) technologies facilitating farm management (e.g.
electronic, telecommunications and laboratory equipment and computers and computer
software); and (iii) marketing and processing equipment (e.g. drying, milling, storage, and
packaging technologies). These technologies have often been promoted as a package, including
credit and technical assistance; the frequently cited examples of which are the Green Revolution
technological packages of high yielding crop varieties (rice or wheat), irrigation water, credit,
fertilizers, pesticides, and extension. At the same time the agricultural extension system serves as
the channel for the reserve flow of agricultural information. It transmits to researchers and policy
markers information about the nature of farmer problems, constraints, and needs that help shape
the nature and structure of future research and technological development.
Table 1: Types of agricultural Information Transferred though Extension
AGRICULTURE INFORMATION
PURE AGRICULTURE INFORMATION INFORMATION IMBODIED IN AGRICULTURAL
TECHNOLOGIES
- Production techniques
- Farm management
- Market and Processing
- Community Development
- Agricultural inputs
- Management Technologies
- Marketing Technologies
- Processing Technologies
Source: (Umali, et al., 1994 p. 30)
2.1.6. Agriculture information dissemination
Traditionally, agricultural extension information was transmitted to the farmers and other clients
via an extension (advisor) agent. However rapid advances in the communication and electronic
industries have also spilled over to the agricultural extension system, offering additional options
for the mass communication of new agricultural information. For example, the use of television,
telefax, video, computer, and satellite technologies has tremendously increased the speed,
coverage, and quality of information transmission. These new technologies have begun to change
the manner in which agricultural extension services are delivered in several countries (Baxter
1989; Westermarck 1991; Wete 1991; Mody 1992).
[13]
2.1.7. Actors in the agriculture information
There are a wide range of suppliers of agricultural extension services; the public sector (as
represented by Ministries/Departments of Agriculture), non-governmental organizations,
nonprofit organizations (e.g. universities and commodity foundation), international research
centers, and the private sector. The private sector may include: (i) farmer associations whose
membership is organized by locality or commodity; (ii) private production and marketing firms
such as input manufacturers and distributors, agro-marketing and processing firms, and trade
associations; and (iii) private consulting and media companies (publishing and
telecommunication firms). Appendix I traces the nature of information, flows and linkages
among the different participants. In addition, farmers can be both beneficiaries and suppliers of
agriculture information (Umali, et al., 1994 p. 8).
2.2. ICT and Agriculture
Information and communication technologies facilitate the processing and transfer of
information, i.e. communication by electronic means. ICT generally link Information processing
devices like radio, television, computers with telecommunication technologies like telephones,
wired or wireless networks. ICTs are a range of electronic technologies which when converged
in new configurations are flexible, adaptable, enabling and capable of transforming organizations
and redefining social relations. “The range of technologies is increasing all the time and there is
a convergence between the new technologies and conventional media” (Michiels and Van
Crowder, 2001). The sphere of ICT has advanced so much that today they are defined as a
booming congregation of technologies that are utilized for collection, storage and sharing of
information & knowledge between people using multiple devices and multiple media (Ahuja,
2011 p. 2).
From the perspective of Agricultural Knowledge and Information Systems (AKIS), ICTs can be
seen as useful in improving linkages between research and extension (agricultural information)
systems. Agricultural extension brings information and new technologies to farming
communities, allowing them to improve their production, incomes and standards of living.
Extension has a major role in pointing the way to increasing the use of knowledge and
information through its people orientation (Lemma, 2009 p. 21).
[14]
2.2.1. Agricultural transformation
Today, many countries economic and social situation is boosting because of the improvement in
the agricultural sector, where, as though, AKST (Agricultural knowledge and Science
Technologies) and Agricultural transformation, inseparably, have had an important influence
(McIntyre, et al., 2009 p. 194); and where other countries believe to double their agricultural
production and productivity in recent years (Example of Ethiopia from 2012 to 2015) (UNDP-
Ethiopia, 2011 p. 33) one could wonder what agricultural transformation is.
Agricultural transformation is the process by which individual farms shift from highly
diversified, subsistence-oriented production towards more specialized production oriented to the
market or other systems of exchange (e.g. long-term contracts). The process involves a greater
reliance on input and output delivery systems and increased integration of agriculture with other
sectors of the domestic and international economies. Agricultural transformation is a necessary
part of the broader process of structural transformation, in which an increasing proportion of
economic output and employment are generated by sectors other than agriculture (Staatz , 1998).
2.3. Rwanda Extension System and ICT
2.3.1. Overview of Rwanda ICT enabling Agricultural advisory and Assistance system
The evolution of Rwanda agriculture extension services from a directive system of extension
(Top down Extension) where farmers were obliged to blindly fill standards defined by the
colonial services (during the colonial period), aiming mainly an introduction of export crops such
as coffee, tea, pyrethrum, cinchona (quinquina) (MINAGRI, 2009 p. 11); to the one assured by
extension agents through T&V (Training and Visits) (MINAGRI, 2009 p. 11) and FFS (Farmer
field school) (MINAGRI, 2009 p. 17) being introduced by World Bank (Beverly D. McIntyre
2009, p.78), in different region of the developing world.
And recently with the recent development of PPP, some public projects and private NGOs were
engaged in extension services; where GoR projects like RSSP (Rural Sector Support Project)
supports NGO service providers which in return, train and supervise farmer’s organizations in
different technical and organizational activities ) (MINAGRI, 2009 p. 13), contributing to rural
development and thus agricultural sector.
[15]
With developing communication sector we have today, different socio-economic groups within
the society have access to different types of ICT devices and services. For this reason, a multi-
layered-approach to the pluralistic extension system is to be taken such that no farmer/producer
is left behind.
In response to this, the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology has put in place
a foundation framework for a robust ICT infrastructure to build upon to strengthen the delivery
of Extension services. Several ICT tools commonly used in other African countries and different
parts of the world are found in Rwanda today. For instance, sms-capable cell phones have
become the “everyman computer” for the average citizen in Rwanda. With mobile phone
branching out beyond its origins as primarily voice-only device to be used for other services such
as banking (paying bills, sending money, paying school fees), the technology could play a key
role in extension services and information delivery.
Other recent innovations include a MINAGRI sponsored service e-Soko that provide current
market price information to farmers and others in the food chain in all common crops in over 50
markets in the country. The Agricultural Information and Communication Centre (CICA) that is
responsible for collecting, producing, processing, adapting, storing, sharing and disseminating
agricultural information relies on ICT tools such as AMIS (The Information Gateway of the
Agricultural and Livestock Sector of Rwanda), the MINAGRI Website, esoko and the Library
web. Adoption of these technologies and many others (Forget Me Not Africa, Market Maker
from University of Illinois) underscores the potential for ICT development to open up frame-
changing advances in agricultural extension education (Nnoung, et al., 2011 p. 3).
In accordance to National Extension Strategy, this new extension tools could contribute to the
spread of national agriculture related policies among others the famous 2020 Vision with its
different strategies (EDPRSs), National agricultural Policy, Strategic Plans for Agriculture
Transformation (PSTA), and other local related initiatives (Ubudehe program, Imihigo,
Integrated Development Program, Agasozi Indatwa, Girinka program,…) as well as international
development goals (Millennium Development Goals, NEPAD Perspectives,…) (MINAGRI,
2009 pp. 5-10). Beside, once these intervening in rural awareness for GoR’s flagship programs,
such as the Crop Intensification Program (CIP) and the Land husbandry, Water Harvesting and
[16]
Hillside Irrigation (LWH) Project, ICT will be playing a greater role to the national agricultural
transformation (World-Bank, 2011 p. 10).
2.3.2. Actors in the Rwanda agriculture domain
Public Sector:
The public sector is represented by the Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources, the
Ministry of Local Government, the National University of Rwanda, other universities and
research institutions, and Agricultural and Veterinary Schools around the country. These
institutions provide extension services through various departments and institutes some of which
are listed below:
Table 2: Public actors in the Rwanda agriculture sector
Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources (MINAGRI) www.minagri.gov.rw
Ministry of Local Government (MINALOC) www.minaloc.gov.rw
Public Research and Education Institutions
Rwanda Agricultural Board (RAB) www.rab.gov.rw
Department of Regional Development, Research and Extension (DRDRE)
Higher Institute of Agriculture and Animal Husbandry (ISAE)
Source: (Nnoung, et al., 2011 pp. 1,2). - Faculty of Agriculture and Rural
Development - Faculty of Agricultural Engineering
and Environmental Sciences Institute of Agriculture, Technology and Education of Kibuko (INATEK)
- Faculty of Education - Faculty of Rural Development National University of Rwanda (NUR)
- Faculty of Agriculture
Umutara Polytechnic - Faculty of Agriculture - Faculty of Veterinary Medicine - Faculty of Agriculture - Faculty of Technology and ICT - Faculty of Business Studies
EAV Kabutare Agricultural and Veterinary School, etc.
[17]
Private Sector Firms:
Rwanda Private Sector is particularly vulnerable because of the country’s history and its mostly
rural nature. The private sector generally focuses on cash crops and income, and addresses
farmer households with strong market links. And among private sector firms that conduct
business with farmers, example is made by Enterprise Urwibotso, Sosoma Industries and MTN
Rwanda (Nnoung, et al., 2011 p. 2).
Non-Governmental Organizations and other Donors:
There are two basic types of International NGOs (INGOs) active in agriculture in Rwanda. These
are the multi-sector, mega-INGOs such as CARE, AFRICARE, World Vision International
(WVI) and Catholic Relief Services (CRS) and the more Agriculture-focused NGOs such as
Land O’Lakes, TechnoServe and Heifer Project International. Amongst the Mega INGOs,
agriculture tends to not be a priority sector and is often included in an integrated livelihood or
food security program that also includes health, water & sanitation, microfinance and education
(Nnoung, et al., 2011 p. 3).
International Organizations and Donors:
E.g. Belgian Development Agency (BTC Rwanda), CIALCA Biodiversity/ IITA/ CIAT-TSBF,
Dairy Development Project (DDP)/ Land O’Lakes, United States Agency for International
Development, (USAID), Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), CATALIST/ IFDC,
ECABREN (Bean Research Network)/ CIAT, PRAPACE (Potato Research Network)/ CIP; and
finally United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (Nnoung, et al., 2011 p. 3).
Non-Governmental Organization:
E.g. Africare, CARE, DUHAMIC_ADRI, HarvestPlus, CRS, RWARRI (Rwanda Rural
Rehabilitation Initiative), UGAM/Centre de Service aux Cooperatives and World Vision
(Nnoung, et al., 2011 p. 3).
Farmers, Farmer Based Organizations and Cooperatives:
[18]
Apart from individual farm work, farmers have the tradition of organizing themselves at local
level into membership-based entities (associations, cooperatives). They mainly organize around
common interest like agricultural production to pool their resources together and facilitate access
to credit and farm inputs. Whether formal or informal, these farmers’ organizations have always
played a role in the relationships between the State and rural society, though overtime their roles
have changed considerably. Many of the farmers’ associations in Rwanda today were created
mainly to benefit from assistance of NGOs. Nevertheless, private or state-own enterprises trading
commodities such as tea and pyrethrum have gained extensive experience with organizing
producers into associations to manage supply operations within the commodity chain. As
examples of commodity-based or community-based Organizations in Rwanda we can say:
KAIGA cooperative (Irish Potatoes growers), COAMVU cooperative (Maize growers),
MURUGO Cooperative (Livestock), Nyiramageni cooperative (Rice production), Impuhwe
z’Imana Women cooperative, Koakaka Cooperative (Café, Karaba), Farmers Group – Gitarama,
Young Women Christian Association (Nnoung, et al., 2011 p. 3).
2.3.3. ICT and Agriculture Extension in Rwanda
For the last decade we enjoy a, monopoly break of tuning on one Rwandan radio station (Radio
Rwanda) (blogs.rnw.nl, 2008).We now count over 16 stations, and others are welcomed,
completed with 1 television station (Rwanda Television); and beside, mobile phone
communication companies are rising in number, today we have three (MTN, TIGO and
AIRTEL) already licensed, and others continue the registration process. All this, thanks to GoR
in general and especially to institutions in charge of communication and information supervision
like REMA and ministry of ICT, which ensure a secure communication using ICT tools among
Rwandan population.
In this context, as mentioned in the EDPRS 2008 (p. 50), “In the ICT sub-sector, 300 telecentres
for the whole country are scheduled (in 2012) and it is planned that telecommunications access
costs will fall from RWF 120 to RWF 60 per minute.”, and today, being installed by RDB, RITA,
PSF…, these telecentres enable the rural awareness to an up-to-date information in different
domains, and accessed through internet network in the rural areas.
[19]
Figure 2: Community telecentre in Kayonza District
Source: (Primary data 2013)
As all these means of communications are good way through which information can reach rural
population, and this last being newly introduced at free (or low) charge, rural development
sectors like agricultural can take advantage on this, and through this can be spread web-based
agriculture advisory information from public or private agro-related websites.
2.4. Online Agriculture Extension Service
2.4.1. Online service
Online services are those that are "delivered" over the Internet. Important data and information
may be accessed through online services. Even the entire Internet itself is considered by some to
be an online service (ehow.com).
2.4.2. Types of Services
Online services range from simple to complex. A simple online service may be as basic as
providing information to researchers. A complex online service might be an application to apply
for financial aid online. Online services include email services, music or movie websites, search
engines and online stores.
[20]
2.4.3. Why web based?
The internet is emerging as a tool with potential to contribute to rural development. It is an
electronic infrastructure, a network of networks which opens a way to have intense
communication, interaction and assistance from other development organizations; offers
opportunities for two-way communication. It can also support bottom-up articulation of
development needs and perception, and thus help in reducing the isolation of rural communities.
It can facilitate dialogue among communities and with government planners, development
agencies, researchers, and technical experts; encourage community participation in decision-
making; and help agricultural researchers, technicians, farmers and others in sharing information
(Hansra, et al., 2008 p. 83), and when used so, is technically called “Cyber Extension”.
2.4.4. Cyber Extension
Cyber extension is extension of agricultural development with the help of Information and
Communication Technologies over cyber space. Cyber space is an imaginary space behind
networked computers through telecom means. This kind of a strong information sharing network
is made possible through power of networks, computer communications and interactive
multimedia.
Tools of a Cyberspace: As Cyber Extension means “Extension over cyber space”, all the internet
tools for developing and accessing Agricultural Information constitute the tools of Cyber
Extension (Ahuja, 2011 p. 4) among others
1. E-mail: Electronic mail is the most frquently used tool in the cyber extension. It allows
us to send and receive text and picture messages from others.
2. World Wide Web: The web is the most population place on the internet. www is an
organization of hypertext documents conatining text, images, animation, sound, video
and increasingly interactive programmes. Websites all around the world can be accessed
in www (Hansra, et al., 2008 p. 85).
Information Needs of Farmers from Cyber Extension: The main focus of ICT in agriculture is
meeting the farmers’ needs for information; the vital needs of farmers that seem to be imperative
for the growth and development of agriculture (Market information, Information on last
[21]
techniques and technologies, Information about rural development programs and subsidies,
Weather forecasting, Latest (best) package of practices, Post-harvest technology, General
agricultural news, Information on insurance claim, Input prices and availability, Early warning
management of diseases and pests, Soil testing and soil sampling information, etc.) (Ahuja, 2011
pp. 3-4), or simply as J.C.AKER argued (Figure 3).
Figure 3: Stages of the Agricultural Production Process and Information Needs
Source: (AKER, 2011 p. 19)
2.4.5. Advantages of Web based over traditional Extension
- Provides 24 x 7 service to farmers.
- Can be accessed from any place on the globe
- Enhanced communication capacity
- Quality of message is kept intact
- Very fast service
- Less costly for farmer compared to traditional extension
- Provision of value information
- Direct access to expert advice (Hansra, et al., 2008 p. 83).
[22]
2.4.6. Advantages of Web based extension over Mobile extension
- Information is accessible in many formats (html, audio, video, and written documents files)
and can be also downloaded.
- Easy stocking and retrieval of information as needed
- Allow interaction between many people from different location at the same time (audio-video
conference)
- Communication using internet is cheaper than mobile phone one.
2.4.7. Components, functions and processes of Cyber extension system
There is no common model for the all Cyber extension system, as this is a new system being
integrated into countries’ agricultural extension, but an adaptation can be made with different
types of ICT system, by reference to Mahrukh Siraj (2012 p. 47) (from a mobile based extension
system to the current web based). The model is design to address challenges such as: converting
extension services into digital information, user friendly access, literacy, impact and financial
sustainability.
The model aims at achieving:
- Provision of reliable and timely actionable information to farmers any time needed. The
information will be about market prices of specific commodities, weather updates for their
area, crop specific advice. The information will be collected, edited and disseminated
through online applications.
- The information may be comprehensible to stakeholders (in their language or with
translations)
- Provide both video and audio based content to overcome literacy barriers
- In case of problems that cannot be addressed via online applications, establishing a physic
meeting backed by experts providing advice in real time.
- The agriculture extension using online tools is automatic unless a group conference, Instant
Messaging (IM) or Personal Messaging (PM) is needed for individual/particular case help.
- Creating sustainability financially and technologically in terms of content.
[23]
Model description:
The farmer information needs can be classified into the following broad categories:
- “What” type needing for standard information e.g. weather, prices, input supplier contacts
etc.
- “How” type can be further classified as:
To know about standard practices, e.g. how to take a sample for soil test
To know about issues that need further assessment.
All these needs could be generally satisfied through online application, unless one needs a direct
assistance by an expert, either from online or on field (direct visit) for demonstration.
The first phase of this model concern the online information exchange, only using online web
application (website).
During the field visit or demonstrate the expert/technician with can use tradition mode of
teaching (with black/green/white board with chalk or marker, paper and pen...) or stocking
devices (DVDs, CD ROM, mp3…) and computers and DVD/CD player Radio/TV Screen, or
simply get into conversation with the person/people who need him/her. Also the information kept
on DVD/CDs, this can help for example for self-training at home for the farmers, but also can
help to field extension staff all over the country as standardized training (as are used books for
traditional extension).
The whole system is catering to the demand that, agriculture information were either aired or too
general (outdated) for their use, and now it will also be accessible to anyone in need.
The use of field visit is designed in the Phase II, after the Phase I will be built.
[24]
Figure 4: Web-based Services Model for Agriculture Extension
Source: (Primary data 2013 (Adapted from Mahrukh Siraj (2012 p. 47) model))
The main components of the model are:
- User base: Farming community, Agriculture extension workers and institutional users.
- User Interface: Web based interface for all extension stakeholders’ interaction.
2.4.8. Opportunity and Constraints for web based system
Opportunity:
Technology adoption has led to a climate of globalization in all sectors of countries’ economic
development; and agricultural informatics is a new concept that has arisen following the rapid
development in information and communication technologies (ICTs), and of the internet
(Gakuru, et al., 2009 p. 2). It is in this context of globalizing agriculture where the need for
[25]
information becomes most vivid. The smallholders, who still provide a significant portion of the
world’s food, need information to advance their work just as much as industrial scale producers
(World-Bank, 2011 p. 25), and increasingly governments realize the necessity to link ICT and
agriculture and incorporate ICT in agricultural sector policies and programmes (Stienen, et al.,
2007 p. 2).
While African countries have over the past decade embarked on the development and the
implementation of their ICT for Development (ICT4D) policies and plans (Dzidonu, 2010 p. 9),
GoR accordingly in NICI III is welcoming private sector to invest in the sector, supporting
research in ICT domains, minimizing and sometime removing taxes on ICT related good on
Rwandan territory; and by installing communication infrastructure to enable people interaction,
the case of rural Telecentres being an example, thanks to the increasing internet network and
optic-fibers coverage. With the needs for agricultural information, and its availability from
different actors, ICT facilities could be a good channel to pass it, and by Web based extension.
Constraints:
First, Web-based extension system presents common constraints to a ICT sector in Rwanda, as
its sub component among other: The insufficient electric energy, limited access to finance to
investors, inadequate international bandwidth, inadequate ICT skills and low ICT awareness and
usage to Rwandan population, nascent private sector resulting in a low ICT investment,
inadequate information security (Cyber Security) and information is subjected to be tracked as
this pass on a global network when not well protected and limited interoperability of government
systems (MINICT, 2011 pp. 19-21). In addition to this one, for already existing information
stocked on hard copies it will take more time and cost to be digitalized before being uploaded or
posted; and in rural communities, where a sparse population implies that potential users live in
area of low demand density, communications costs will be higher and services will be less well
developed (Lemma, 2009 p. 32).This is due to what is known as the economics of networks
(May, et al., 2007 p. 33).
2.4.9. Successful examples of ICT enabled extension systems
The impact of ICT based agricultural extension inspired a many initiatives and all over the
world, some examples are here shown for illustrative purpose:
[26]
- Kilimo Salama: Mobile Technology to facilitate insurance of farming input (Kenya)
- DrumNet: Web based and mobile technology offering low cast solution for facilitating
interaction between value chain partners.
- esoko.com: provide current market data via SMS within agriculture and trade sector
(Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi,
Mozambique, Nigeria, Rwanda, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe).
KenCall: Voice based services providing agro-information to farmers in Kenya
(Markets-Inclusive-Monitor, 2011 p. 9).
- Agriwatch.com: Is a website which provide to farmers update information about yield
and prices of the agriculture commodities, Enables access to a large amount of
agribusiness related information covering more than 15 sub sectors within the
Agricultural and Food Industry (India) (Patil, et al., 2011 p. 22).
- Agriculture.com: Is an online farm management resource for agriculture news,
information on markets and crop, weather in different globe areas and with ag-talk/IM
(Instant Messaging) hosted in Florida (USA) (digsitevalue.org, 2013).
- esoko.gov.rw: A Minagri sponsored and World Bank funded project, empowering
farmers to make good market and pricing decisions and ultimately successful farming
(CICA-ICT)
- Etc.
[27]
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
For any research to be successful, some norms have to be fixed before, and these norms
constitute methodologies leading the research. This chapter presents the methodology for
different steps (the collection of data, analyzing and presenting results, to be used for this study).
For each step of the research, a number of processes to be utilized are also described.
3.1. Research design/plan
For a good research, some points have to be focused on. The researcher have to define type of
the Universe and Source list/Framework sample (Case study/Study area), Sampling unit and
Sample size, Parameters of interest (Targeted population), Budgetary (if any) and Sampling
procedure. (Kothari, 2004 p. 56)
3.1.1. Targeted population
Nowadays, the need for interaction among different actors, in the agricultural sector, is a crucial
issue, and for the whole country. This research might reflect a true situation in that domain, but
with limited means and time the researcher tried to get a fair statistical representative number of
actors, from whom to get information.
Three types of respondents were taken into consideration among others:
- Individual farmers and farmer associations
- Field extension agents (Sectors’ agronomists)
- Some agricultural institutional experts
a. Individual farmers and farmer associations
This range comprises primary producers of agricultural (farm and livestock) materials; all small,
big farmers and farmer cooperatives (on a commodity or location base). Their needs in the
extension information consisting, many kinds of information but at basic level needs (crop
planting, inputs and improved variety buying, planting techniques, harvesting, selling of
agricultural product as well as general agricultural news, national and local agricultural politic).
[28]
b. Field extension agents (Sector agronomists)
As after the adoption of decentralization, most of public services have been attributed to the
lowest administration level to the population, concerning the agricultural extension at farm level;
more tasks are now assured through field extension agent at Sector level; and these in attribution
of MINALOC (MINAGRI, 2009 p. 25). These technicians constitute agricultural information
intermediaries (Figure 1) between agricultural institutions and farmers, but also are good
advisors at farm level as skilled technicians.
c. Some agricultural institutions
The highest level of stakeholders in national agricultural extension domain consists of Ministry
of agriculture and public/private institutions acting in agriculture domain. They are the ones in
charge of designing, monitoring, implementing and evaluating national agricultural policies. As
the current system will create linkages among agriculture stakeholders, their roles are mainly for
the publication of agricultural policies, and following up the adoption and success/failure of their
implementation to beneficiaries.
3.1.2. Sampling procedures and sample size (Respondents sorting)
a. Farmer household visit
The sample unit for the current study was the farmer’s household; and for well reflecting the
more statistically efficient situation, some sampling methods have to be used. The choice had to
be made based on Rwanda administration stratification, in 5 different steps (Multi-stage
sampling of fifth order, (5 choices):1 for Provinces, 1 for Districts, 2 for Sectors (both between
and within/sample size) and 1 for household selection.
As first 4 steps needed to be chosen randomly based on national administration stratification,
indices plan was elaborated. Indexing method was made as following:
- For all 4 Provinces and Kigali City an index was provided from 1 to 5 ordered by alphabetic
order.
- Within these Provinces, Districts are also indexed from 1 to n (n being the number of
Districts within a considered Province) and this is indexed by alphabetic order.
[29]
- And within District, Sectors are also indexed from α to β (β being the letter corresponding to
the number of Sectors present in this District; a=1, b=2, c=3, d=4, …, u=21)
- From these indices, the researcher drew tables for helping in sampling method.
As illustrated in Appendix VIII, showing “Rwanda administration stratification” and Appendix
IX, showing “Indices for sampling plan” (see Appendices section on this document), sampling
was done as following:
Step I. Provinces choice:
The researcher decided to choose 3 out of 5 Provinces. A Simple Random sampling was used,
and with SPSS Software (IBM SPSS Statistics 20), the results from the Province index basis
gave the following combination:
1 – 2 – 4 which represented 3 Provinces: Eastern Province, Kigali City and Southern Province
(Appendix IX).
Step II. Districts choice:
From each Province resulted from the Step 1 an indices list of Districts within this was entered
and processed in SPSS for Simple Random sampling, and had to be sort 1 District had to be
sorted.
Result of the Step II gave:
- For the Eastern Province: among 7 Districts, was chosen District of index 3 which is
Kayonza District,
- For Kigali City: among 3 Districts, was chosen District of index 1 which is Gasabo,
- And for Southern Province: among 8 Districts was chosen District of index 3 which is
Kamonyi District.
Step III. Sectors choice (between different Sectors of a District):
- At this stage only 2 Districts were considered, and visited in first time: Kayonza and
Kamonyi Districts, in the first time. And this because the researcher planned to visit the
3rd one (Gasabo) while visiting farmers’ associations, helped by RAB extension team.
(See “Farmer association visit” section)
[30]
For the 2 Districts visited for individual farmer’s survey, the choice of Sector (as has to be
visited 1 Sector by District) was made from a Non-probability method based on the easy to be
accessed site (Sector) and where is available a public Telecentre, by the author.
The choice was as following:
- For Kayonza District was chosen Mukarange sector, which on the map was indexed as
1c3.
- For Kamonyi District was chosen Gacurabwenge Sector, which on the map was indexed
as 4a3.
Step IV. Sample size choice (to get the number of sample size within a Sector):
By the fact that the 4 sites to be visited (Gacurabwenge, Mukarange and 2 farmer associations in
Gasabo District) were so scattered, and their characteristics were not homogeneous (see “Study
area” section of this chapter), the researcher fail to consider the sites as a continuous population,
and cannot use Sampling with probability proportion to size of population; but sharing the same
parameters of interest which are the agricultural practices and need of extension information. For
this, a fixed number of 20 respondents (households) has been set per Sector, and 10 by farmer
association.
Step V. Household visit:
The choice of farmer households to be visited was made by Systematic Sampling, where the
researcher used to enter in 1 of 3 consecutive houses (enters the first and jump 2nd and the 3rd for
entering in the 4th house), on the selected sites in Step III.
b. Field extension agents
The choice of extension agents to be interviewed was based on the above chosen sites. The
conversation was held between Sector agronomists for both Sectors whose individual farmers’
households were visited, and the researcher. Hence were interviewed Sector agronomist of
Mukarange and one of Gacurabwenge.
[31]
c. Farmer association visit
The association visits was conducted on dates of 13 – 14 March, 2013. Helped by the extension
team from RAB, the researcher was able to visit 2 farmers’ associations in Gasabo Sector. The
choice of site/association to be visited was led by RAB Extension Agent schedule of work:
- ABASHIRIKABUTE BA GASABO, a farmers’ cooperative covering Binunga, Rumuli
and Nyirabwana Villages of Gisharu cell in Kinyinya Sector. Operating in Mbonwa
section of Nyagisenyi-Rusigiza marsh.
- And IMISUGI, a cooperative of farmers and cow breeders (on a common area:
IBIKUMBA) and farmers in Mirambi Village of Shango cell in Nduba Sector.
d. Public institutions visited
With limited means and time, only 2 institutions were visited for interview, based on their role in
Rwanda extension services. These were:
- CICA: The MINAGRI Centre in charge of agriculture information dissemination, and the
interview was held between the researcher and the CICA Library representative Mrs.
Tharcicie MUSEMINARI.
- RAB: Dealing with the national agricultural policies and through its Extension
Department in collaboration with MINALOC, help to empower field technicians and
farmers with agricultural skills. As one of RAB researchers and Extension expert Dr.
Leonidas DUSENGEMUNGU was the one meeting the investigator for explaining what
are duties, responsibilities, partners and experiences of RAB/Extension department in
agricultural activities.
3.1.3. Study area
This research being conducted from different sites (Districts) and institutions, a small
presentation of case studies has to be done.
[32]
a. Sites presentation
Table 2: Overview of sites (Districts) for the case studies
Districts KAYONZA KAMONYI GASABO
Characteristics
Geography Eastern Province;
1,935 sq.km
N-E (Gatsibo), E
(Rwamagana), S-E
(Ngoma), S (Kirehe), W
(Tanzania);
Southern Province;
655 sq.km area;
N(Rulindo & Gakenke),
O(Muhanga)
S(Ruhango), E(Bugesera
& Nyarugenge)
Kigali city; N-E
(Rulindo), N-O
(Gicumbi) S-W
(Rwamagana),
E(Nyarugenge),
S(Kicukiro)
Climate favorable for Agricultural Temperate; 1200-1400
mm rain, 20°C
26.3°C
Soil soil components that
combine at a lenient
level, also sandy soils
favorable for use in
construction
Arable humifere
generally and
somewhere granitic and
with sandy-clayey
Soil with clay layer
Economy Forests: Akagera
national park, and human
made,
Agriculture: Banana,
beans, vegetables,
potatoes
Animal breeding: cow,
goats, rabbit, poultry
Agriculture: cassava,
potatoes, beans, soya,
peas, banana, irish-
potatoes, rice, yam,
groundnut, maize, coffee
and legumes;
Animal breeding: cow,
goats, sheep, rabbit,
poultry
Forests: plantation by
individuals
46% use elect.pow
Even if is mostly
urban, some region do
practice agriculture;
Agriculture: Maize,
beans, banana,
legumes
Animal breeding:
cow, goats, sheep,
rabbit, poultry
Population Over 258,606 hab,
132 hab/sq.km, 54,602
265 365 hab;
404.8hab/sq.km
477.000 hab; aver.
4.8/house
[33]
households
Transport &
communication
With a common bus
station and two main
asphalt roads and ones
between Sectors; the
communication by
phone, radio and internet
coverage.
Crossed by an asphalt
road, and other routes;
have access to the
internet connection from
MTN, and mobile phone
communication
Phone:75.5%,
Radio:57.5%
The internet coverage
is good with different
provider TIGO, MTN
and AirTel.
Roads are also
available as main
roads in urban centers
and small roads
between Sectors
Source: ( (DFID(Gasabo), et al., 2011), (DFID(Kamonyi), et al., 2011), (KAYONZA), (climate-
data.org))
b. Institutions’ presentation
RAB:
Mission
RAB (Rwanda Agricultural Board) has the general mission of developing agriculture and animal
husbandry through their reform and using modern methods in crop and animal production,
research, agricultural extension, education and training of farmers in new technologies.
Responsibilities
In particular, RAB shall have the following responsibilities:
- To implement the national policy of agriculture and animal husbandry;
- To contribute in determining policy in agriculture, animal husbandry, agricultural and
animal husbandry research and technology;
- To provide farmers and consumers of agricultural products with information, techniques
and services meant for improving their profession and supplying the internal market with
[34]
increased and quality production thereby raising their agricultural and animal husbandry
incomes;
CICA:
"Centre d'Information et de Communication Agricole" - "Agricultural Information and
Communication Centre" with the overall objective of ensuring that “agricultural knowledge is
regularly collected, produced, processed, adapted, stored, disseminated and shared”.
Main activities:
Agricultural information services through 5 departments: ICT "Website and AMIS", Extension
material development, Audio Visual Extension material Development, Library and GIS. (CICA-
Library)
3.2. Methods of data collection
3.2.1. Tools for primary data collection
Different methods used during a research, are the means by which data were collected. During
the present study. The tools used for collecting primary data are herewith described:
3.2.1.1.Questionnaire
The questionnaire (also called survey) is a set of questions given (asked) to a sample of people.
The purpose is to gather information about the people’s attitudes, thoughts, behavior and so
forth. The researchers compile the answers of the people in the sample in other to know how the
group as a whole thinks or behaves (Lanthier, 2002).
Based on this definition, the researcher collected the information using a set of structured
questions to judge if it is worth to build an Extension system using Web tools technologies to
link different agricultural stakeholders; and if yes, what kind of information may be spread
through this system. It is in this perspective that 2 different questionnaires were prepared, one set
for farmers at their field/household level and the second being addressed to field extension
agents (Sector agronomists). The questionnaires were made of open-ended and closed, 26
questions for farmers and 30 for extension agents.
[35]
For farmer questionnaire, more questions are designed as closed, because between many people,
comparison need to be done about an agricultural situation with the same subject matter,
questions and with the same options, and for being easily answered; whereas the questionnaire
meant to extension agents is more open-ended as these have to give with more technical
precisions and personal views, what do farmers in his/her responsibilities need, and his/her
professional needs in particular.
3.2.1.2.In-depth interview
In the present study, based on the thought that “The in-depth interview is a technique designed to
elicit a vivid picture of the participant’s perspective on the research topic” and that “During in-
depth interviews, the person being interviewed is considered the expert and the interviewer is
considered the student” (Mack, et al., 2005 p. 29) The researcher wanted to learn about the real
situation, concerning agricultural practices, information access and needs, among agricultural
stakeholders, and interview was done when collecting data from institution. A list of few
questions was prepared for getting a view point of institutions engaged in agricultural extension
services in Rwanda.
One expert from each of the visited institutions met the researcher for the conversation, and the
data was collected. These were consisting of the interviewer’s notes and documenting on the
interviews content, participant and the context.
3.2.1.3.Observation
During the researcher’s visits, field direct observations were considered, as these were recording
of what experienced, learned through interaction with other people and what observed. He used a
direct observation and not participant observation, as the former help to observe certain sampled
situation or people rather than becoming immersed in the entire context; and because of a limited
time we had (direct observation requiring less time than participant observation) (BSG-
Psychology, 2012).
The observation is also a tool to complement valid and clear information provided within the
questionnaire.
[36]
3.2.2. Secondary Data collection (Documentation)
With the actual Extension Model in Rwanda, consisting mainly of farmer visits by Extension
Agents, from different private and public institutions, it was difficult to find previous research
and reports supporting or relating to the subject of “Online Extension Services”, by Rwandans
researchers. Only few local (Rwandan) documents on agricultural politics and practices, ICT
development and strategies have been checked; fortunately, the experience from many relative
initiatives of foreign writers (AKER, 2011; Ahuja, 2011; Lemma, 2009; etc) allowed the
accomplishment of the present study on “Agriculture Development Through Online Agro-
Advisory System in Rwanda”, and many of these are available and/or downloadable through the
internet. The Reference section list a number of these books along with their authors.
3.3. Web Application development and design
As for any web application release, the current study required a number of procedures to be
adopted, for it to be efficient:
3.3.1. Analysis and Research
By analysis and research, the researcher wanted to get accurate information about the current
situation, and get the view point of the application target audience. These steps consist of the
survey and data analysis of this study which were discussed in the above sections.
3.3.2. User centric information architecture
To improve website usability, the information architecture of library website must be designed to
meet the real needs from users. For these, after analysis and data presentation, the researcher had
designed how the information may be passed for user's real needs.
The practice shows that there is clearer hierarchy in the information architecture of the library
website that is designed based on user-centered method, and it is easier for users to understand
and acquire information and services provided by the library. In other words, the information
architecture designed by user-centered method is with more reasonable information
classification, more clear information structure and much higher usability (IEEE-Xplore, 2013) .
[37]
3.3.3. Web Application development and design
The proper “application development” along with “web designing” are the center and long
process web application development & design. For the current study, a number of methods and
tools have been used.
Framework: is a package of PHP coded objects, prepared and tested by experienced
programmers for being used by anyone who needs them. For the current work, Symfony
framework version 2.1.8 was used.
Software: a number of developing softwares were been used, among others:
- Adobe Dreamweaver CS6
- Notepad++ v6.2.2
- phpDesign8
- XAMPP Version 1.8.1
- Git version 1.8.0
- Internet browsers (Google Chrome Version 26, Mozilla Firefox 16, Internet Explorer 10
and Opera 11)
- Adobe Photoshop CS6
- JetBrains phpStorm 5.0.4
Tools: the personal computer is what has been used for tasks of web application development
and designing for the current study.
Language: The current application was written using programming languages such as PHP
(Hypertext preprocessor), HTML (Hypertext Markup Language) (through twig template engine)
and CSS (Cascading Style Sheet); and text was edited in English language.
Form of displaying data: The data are present on the system in many different form: Video,
audio and downloadable single or compressed files, as well as written articles, browsed in the
hypertext from (text on the web pages).
[38]
3.3.4. Testing
Before the site deployment to the Remote Server (Online server), this has to be tested locally on
the machine, and for current research this was possible by use of XAMPP (An open source
cross-platform web server stack package). This last software creates a Local Server where
website files are stored, and where through phpMyAdmin (tool written in PHP intended to
handle the administration of MySQL with the use of a web browser) databases are stored,
accessed and linked to those files.
3.3.5. Deployment
The final product, ready to be browsed, may be deployed online, but some additional few
requirements are:
Hosting space: is an online space (allocated from the Remote Server), where can be stored site
files as were on local server, and be accessible at any time by anyone on the world (if not
restricted from access). For getting access to this space, the site owner have to know Host name,
username, password, and port used by this server; and all of these have to be kept secret, as these
are logins specific to each web space alone.
Domain name / Sub-domain or IP of the server: Are three forms of name or address, from which
the website is accessible, for the current study, the site will be accessed through a sub-domain
called roaas.intashyo.net
Computer with internet connection: all online activities require an enabled internet connection.
Hence to allow the site owner to access the Remote Server for edit, delete or upload new files.
FTP Client software: With all this above requirements completed, the site has to be uploaded,
and this can be done by use this specific software – For the current study, Filezilla 3.6 – was
used, and by filling logins (as were described in the point “Hosting space”)
[39]
Figure 5: Process in Web application development and designing
Source: (Invomtech, 2012)
[40]
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter presents the collected data from different respondents using different tools. Like
excel and SPSS. The data will be presented in form of graphs and tables. Finally, findings will be
discussed with support of different literatures.
This will allow elaboration of an online web application, and features of which will thereafter be
explained.
4.1. Description of respondents
During the visits and data collection (as described in the Targeted population section in Chapter
III), the researcher met different types of agricultural stakeholders. The Table 3below distributes
them according to their number and type of activities and from which analysis will concern.
Table 3: On field agricultural and institutional actors visited during this research
On field Individuals by Sectors Associations
Cases MUKARANGE
(27 816 houses)
80% in
agriculture.
GACURABWENGE
(26 000 houses)
80% in agriculture.
KINYINYA NDUBA
ABASHIRIKABUTE
(56 members)
IMISUGI
(18 members)
Farmers 20 (31.2%) 20 (31.2%) 10 (15.6%) 10 (15.6%)
Extension agents 1 (1.5%) 1 (1.5%)
Institution Field extension Online Extension.
services
Names RAB CICA
Experts 1 (1.5%) 1 (1.5%)
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
[41]
The above table (Table 3) shows (with a total number of 64 respondents corresponding to 100%
questioned) that for each Mukarange and Gacurabwenge Sectors 20 farmers and 1 Sectorial
agronomist were questioned; and two associations, one from Kinyinya Ssector
(ABASHIRIKABUTE BA GASABO) and one from Nduba Sector (IMISUGI) were visited,
where 10 members were questioned for each. Moreover, an interview was held between the
researcher and one expert from RAB, and one from CICA, in different times.
Thus, during the research 62.4% of respondents were individual farmers, 31.2% farmers working
in famers’ cooperatives, 3% extension agents and 3% agricultural institution experts.
In the next section, more emphasis will be put on farmers (in agriculture and/or livestock
domain), as they are ones to work on farm as implementers of agricultural policies. Thereafter,
the results will be presented from the next level actors: agriculture extension agents (Sectorial
agronomists) as they are spreaders of agricultural information, and finally views from
agricultural institutions, the policy designers and makers will be discussed.
4.2. Farmers
To learn about interviewed farmers, the researcher judged better to follow a certain hierarchy for
a clear and gradual understanding of the real situation: farmers’ characteristics, activities and
practices, training and extension information, ICT extension mode and web based tools
awareness to rural farmers.
4.2.1. Farmers’ characteristics
The following chart summarize the general characteristics of our population; it illustrates the
situation by sex, age, marital status, family size, level of school education, other education
skills and the respondents’ profession respectively.
[42]
Figure 6: Respondent farmers' characteristics
Source: (Primary data 2013)
As shown in the above Figure 6, the respondents aged from18 years old and above, at 100%, is
considered to be so mature to provide real information on a current situation. And from the fact
that up to 98.3% of respondents are engaged in agricultural sector as their main profession, the
researcher was convinced that they could answer fairly what need to be known concerning the
agricultural domain, in their regions.
Moreover with 70% of them have been to school, these makes them to be considered not
illiterate, and they can use different mode of extension using written information; and among
others one using online tools, and from which the application we want to build from this study
will take part.
4.2.2. Agricultural activities and practices
4.2.2.1. Agricultural activities
From the question number 13 of farmer questionnaire, we learned about the population
distribution among different activities (Figure 7), and as expected to be more concentrated in
agricultural relating activities, - and as the main profession statistics showed in the above Figure
6 -, the main activities are then farming and animal breeding at Village level.
40
.0% 60
.0%
0.0
%
36
.7%
63
.3%
13
.3%
73
.3%
1.7
% 11
.7%
41
.7% 58
.3%
0.0
%
30
.0%
23
.3%
20
.0%
3.3
%
10
.0%
3.3
%
6.7
%
3.3
%
0.0
%
88
.3%
6.7
%
1.7
%
3.3
%
98
.3%
0.0
%
0.0
%
1.7
%
0.0%
20.0%
40.0%
60.0%
80.0%
100.0%
120.0%
Population profile
[43]
Figure 7: Activities distribution among respondents
Source: (Primary data 2013)
All respondents engaged in agricultural sector 98.3%, do farming activities and many of them
complement it with animal breeding, this last occupying 78.3% of total activities in the region.
4.2.2.2. Agricultural practices
Referring to the above figure, one may think, agricultural activities and/or practices are
distributed equally all over the case studies. But this could be a mistake, because as cited in the
“Study area” section of Chapter III, of this study, we have different soil properties and climate
conditions for different sites visited. This is why a distinction has to be done not only for
information need but also for studying agricultural practices done by respondent farmers. The
adoption of different practices is distributed among different cases (regions) and different
farmers’ categories (farmers working individually and farmers operating in cooperatives) in
Figure 8 and Figure 9, for better understanding of what crop or livestock is developed better in
those regions.
The Figure 8 shows the distribution of practices in farming activity, from base to top, are listed:
cereals, vegetables, legumes, tubers, roots and fruits; and the Figure 9, shows the distribution
of practices in livestock activity, where from bottom to top, are listed: cows, goats, sheep, pigs,
rabbits and poultry.
98.3%
78.3%
1.7%
5.0%
0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% 120.0%
Farming
Animal breeding
Extension services
Other
[44]
Figure 8: Practices distribution for farming Figure 9: Practices distribution for
livestock
Source: (Primary data 2013)
From the above two charts, the situation is clearly illustrated, and some explanations can be that:
IMISUGI and ABASHIRIKABUTE are two farmers’ cooperatives in Gasabo District, based on
commodity and location. For the first (IMISUGI) their activity are related to cow breeding on the
same house, where benefiting from common water, one caretaker and from where they can
collect the dung for their cultivation. They plan recently to build a common biogas plant for their
Mirambi Village (for their home cooking or electricity); also with their newly adoption in
terraces cultivation, they started growing maize on hill side. That is why they have 100% of
cattle breeding and 10% of cereals. ABASHIRIKABUTE on their side, it is also a farmers’
association based on Land Use Consolidation (LUC) program in marshland of Nyagasenyi-
Rusigiza, and their main focus is growing maize, although other cultivation can be found like
legumes, that’s why the above Figure 8 locate them 100% on both cereals as for legumes.
60.0%35.0%
100.0%100.0%
85.0%50.0%
100.0%10.0%
0.0%85.0%
0.0%0.0%
35.0%25.0%
0.0%10.0%
75.0%90.0%
0.0%0.0%
90.0%30.0%
0.0%10.0%
0.0% 50.0% 100.0% 150.0%
MukarangeGacurabwengeAbashirikabute
Imisugi
MukarangeGacurabwengeAbashirikabute
Imisugi
MukarangeGacurabwengeAbashirikabute
Imisugi
MukarangeGacurabwengeAbashirikabute
Imisugi
MukarangeGacurabwengeAbashirikabute
Imisugi
MukarangeGacurabwengeAbashirikabute
Imisugi
45.0%60.0%
10.0%100.0%
50.0%45.0%
0.0%10.0%
0.0%20.0%
0.0%0.0%
0.0%5.0%
0.0%10.0%
0.0%5.0%10.0%
5.0%
20.0%10.0%
20.0%20.0%
0.0% 50.0% 100.0% 150.0%
MukarangeGacurabwengeAbashirikabute
Imisugi
MukarangeGacurabwengeAbashirikabute
Imisugi
MukarangeGacurabwengeAbashirikabute
Imisugi
MukarangeGacurabwengeAbashirikabute
Imisugi
MukarangeGacurabwengeAbashirikabute
Imisugi
MukarangeGacurabwengeAbashirikabute
Imisugi
[45]
The distribution of the remaining practices are much scattered because they are not focuses for a
certain group of farmers; but as can be seen, cultivation of roots dominates in Gacurabwenge.
From the observation of the researcher and background history of the region, the farming activity
in Southern Province is more dominated by Potatoes and Cassava plantation (90%) of
respondents as indicated in Figure 8 whereas some legumes and fruits are cultivated by 85% and
30% of respondents respectively.
Even without any cooperative intervention, farmers in Gacurabwenge Sector like the cattle
breeding, where up to 60% of respondents owns at least one cow, and a few goats, poultry and
sheep.
For Mukarange Sector, vegetables dominate where these are cultivated by 90% of respondents,
because of their historical preference of banana plantation in the region (the former Kibungo
Province), followed by vegetables mainly tomatoes, eggplants, etc. at 85% of farmer
respondents, and also can be grown potatoes and cassava representing 70% of adoption among
respondents.
The animal breeding now being decreased these days is due to the obligation of keeping cattle in
the cow house, the result for this is shown by only 45% respondents breed at least one animal..
4.2.2.3. Land holding size
The farmers’ classification according to land holding size standards in Rwanda, categorizes them
into small (below 2 ha) and big farmers (from 2 ha and above) as explained by RAB expert.
But because of land scarcity among farmers in Rwanda, and from the fact that our respondents
were mostly in small farmer category, the researcher classified them in below ½ ha, between ½ -
1 ha and l ha and above as three small classes.
Table 4 below shows results:
[46]
Table 4: Land holding size for farmer respondents
LAND SIZE FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Below 0.5ha 18 30%
Between 0.5 – 1ha 21 35%
Beyond 1ha 21 35%
Total 60 100%
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
From the representative sample of 60 farmers as showed on Table 4, 30% hold less than ½ ha of
land. Within this class are included those living on land rent for a temporally cultivation (here
considered as farmers with no land) and a great number of those practicing agriculture with other
activities (public work, merchants, etc.).
The second class, occupied by farmers holding from ½ to 1ha land size, represented by 35% of
respondents. These are small farmers living almost entirely on their agricultural activities, but
claiming get more knowledge of using small land they own for a greater productivity.
And the third class of farmers, with whom we discussed, was made of farmers holding more than
1ha land size, represented 35% of respondents. These are producers, relying on agricultural
commodities, satisfying their household consumption and could produce for the market. Among
these, we found mostly those concentrating their production on one crop or livestock product.
Classes represented here give a general view of agricultural land holding situation in Rwanda
rural areas (from case studies), and from which different information types and trainings can be
provided.
The current section aimed at informing about the farmers from whom the study was conducted,
and this could help for a better understanding of the “Why” and “How” of the agricultural
information needs and provision vis-à-vis our farmers, which is the focus for the next section of
this work.
[47]
4.2.3. Agricultural information sufficiency
The assessment for the agricultural information sufficiency as a crucial matter helping in
preparing the next trainings to be passed to farmers or improving the existing ones, this
constitutes one of the main objectives this study intends to reach. This will be possible after
some points will be discussed like: Which agricultural training have been previously provided to
farmer, which was their target population (what group of people was it meant for), and what
lessons learnt.
In addition, the trainings provided will be assessed to see whether they yield the positive
outcomes as compared to the trainings’ plan. Finally, the access to agricultural information by
farmers will be evaluated.
4.2.3.1. Agricultural trainings
Traditionally, agricultural trainings in Rwanda are provided by specialized public, private
institutions and NGOs acting in agricultural domain, through their extension agents or team.
Among our respondents, a certain number of them have got access to some trainings as
represented here in Figure 10 and Figure 11:
Figure 10: Number of farmers who benefited from trainings
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
For a number of 40 individual farmers (20%) have been trained at least once in an agricultural
training whereas those operating in farmers’ association (30%) of 20 respondents were also
trained. The researcher tried to compare these to group of farmers, for explaining the reason for
these inequalities.
20.0%
30.0%
0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0%
Individuals
In association
[48]
As explained by RAB expert: “We encourage farmers for working in cooperatives because it will
be easy for us to provide inputs, agricultural training and following how they implement what we
tough them, on their field.” This means that farmers in cooperatives are easily reachable, than
ones working individually, and that beyond the agricultural productivity as a common shared
profit from their association, they benefit also from assistance for their agricultural activities.
Different actors have been engaged in the agricultural assistance to rural farmers in Rwanda, and
through different programs like RSSP, GoR empowers those service providers (MINAGRI, 2009
p. 13).
The contribution of them in extension services in the study case sites are illustrated in following
Figure 11:
Figure 11: Agricultural information got by respondents through trainings
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
The illustration on Figure 11:
Figure 11, informing on agricultural information got by different respondents, is taken from the
total number of farmers affirmed to have attended at least, one agricultural training; as cited
above to be 14 out of 60 respondents.
From researcher observation and details from open questions on the questionnaire, and this
situation can be explained. Here the basic bar representing farming techniques, is too long (with
64.3%) because, as it’s better to teach people what relates to their activities, the trainings
provided to these farmers (either individually or in cooperatives) include farming and animal
64.3%
21.4%
35.7%
35.7%
21.4%
14.3%
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0%
Farming techniques
Market
Diseases and pests occurance
Seed/Livestock improved varieties
Environmental protection
Others
[49]
breeding systems and techniques. For instance, currently every farmer knows the benefit of not
combining many crops on the same land –even if many of them are still doing so–, and they are
tough to leave a certain space between consecutive crops, like for banana (2m of distance
between consecutive lines and rows).
The next two bars, 35.7% of respondents indicated that among the information obtained from
trainings include Seeds/Livestock improved varieties and Diseases/Pests occurrence. This being
more concentrated among farmers in cooperatives, is simply explained by having adopted one or
few commodities, and where it is simple to be reached by extension agents (public or private),
they take advantage of information relating to their product, about improved varieties, inputs,
diseases and pest by what insecticides/pesticides or techniques these can be fight. This kind of
information is less accessible to individual farmer because as growing many products types at a
time, it will be difficult to guess and reach the farmer needs, for any of his/her practices (items).
Thirdly, markets information distributed to 21.4% of farmer respondents allocated needed mostly
to farmers, as cited above owning large scales of lands, and having satisfied their household
consumption needs. This knowledge was provided to both individual farmers and farmers in
cooperatives.
A number of NGOs used to train rural farmers on methods of environmental protection, and the
GoR through local leaders teaches the people about the protection of forest, water, etc. but, as
said by Mukarange agronomist “Because these are not directly benefiting to house development
or household consumption, they don’t make it their priority”, this is what explained by 21.4% of
respondents having attended trainings.
The remaining bar having 14.3% among trained respondents, represents those who have learnt
about other subject not relating to the agricultural domain. An example from collected data is
made by, training concerning with fighting against Malaria, Family planning and Use of
computer machines.
4.2.3.2. Impact of trainings
More precisely the evaluation of outcomes could be done from comparing two different
situations, before adoption or getting trainings and after by difference-in-differences analysis or
[50]
by information score methods. But because no previous researches were available on the current
subject, the researcher decided to use simple questions to the beneficiaries of trainings among
respondents. The impacts have been classified into 4 different types (Figure 12), all indicating
the improvement made to the participants in the trainings.
Figure 12: Impact of agricultural trainings (from trained respondents)
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
Evaluation of impact from the above chart (Figure 12), because of trainings the agricultural
productivity was increased for all respondents who have attended. Among 14 trained
respondents, 57% of them, from lesson they got, benefited the intellectual knowledge. 21.4% of
the respondents for economic development and others respectively.
4.2.3.3. Sufficiency of training
After the impact of trainings have been assessed, it was worthwhile to know whether these
reached the optimum level as was expected by participants or the outcomes planned by the
trainers. From respondents’ answers, results from this question are summarized in the Table 5
below.
Table 5: Training sufficiency
SUFFICIENT FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Yes 5 35.7%
No 9 64.3%
Total 14 100%
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
100.0%
57.1%
21.4%
21.4%
0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% 120.0%
Agricultural production
Intellectual development
Economic development
Other
[51]
A rate of only 35.7% of respondents who got trainings were satisfied with the impact of these
trainings, whereas 64.3% were not.
4.2.4. Information needs
4.2.4.1. Agricultural information access
Some traditional mode of getting information (with no special trainings) could not be neglected
for the dissemination of agricultural information. That’s why during this research, the
investigator tries to figure out which agricultural information do different respondents have
access to. From respondents’ answers, results are depicted in the following chart.
Figure 13: Agricultural information accessed to by farmer
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
The Figure 13, indicates that 81.7% of total respondents have access to seeds and livestock
information, they know what are good crop and livestock varieties for good productivity, and
63.3% of respondents have benefited from knowledge related to pests and diseases occurrence.
Therefore, they can with help of local extension agents (abakangurambaga b’ubuhinzi
n’ubworozi) cure or prevent their crop or livestock from sickness. 65% of respondents are able to
participate to the environmental protection actions, whereas 61.7% know something on how to
use fertilizers and others inputs, and mechanization tools. And at a rate of 53.3%, 41.7% and
28.3% of total respondents can get information concerning respectively market, transport cost for
agricultural products and information from mentors for their agricultural activities.
61.7%
41.7%
53.3%
28.3%
65.0%
63.3%
81.7%
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0%
Inputs/Mechanization
Transport cost
Market
Mentors
Environmental protection
Diseases/Pests occurance
Seeds/Livestock improved varieties
[52]
4.2.4.2. Needs in agricultural training
From the needs of respondents, the researcher assessed the agricultural information needed by
farmers for their good productivity. As this was one of objectives of this research, we tried with
help of respondents’ answers from research survey, to assess these needs, and results of which
are presented in Figure 14.
Figure 14: Training needs among farmer respondents
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
Examining Figure 14, some points have to be highlighted for the agricultural training needs.
From a total number of respondents, 40.0% need to know more about good seeds and livestock
varieties for their agricultural practices, and their use. 31.7% mentioned Inputs and
mechanization knowledge whereas 20% of respondents indicated that the diseases and pests
prevention trainings are desired. And also at the same rate, environmental protection, mentorship
and sponsorship and transport cost related trainings are wished by 13.3% of total respondents for
each type. Other remaining types of trainings are wished by 11.7% among farmers we talked to.
4.2.4.3. Difference in information (training) needs rate
The evaluation of agricultural information needs rate differences, has to be tested to know
whether some trainings have to be more concentrated to one region/category than another. This
can be done either between or within farmers’ groups (individual or in cooperatives). For this a
statistical test, helped the researcher to draw the following Table 6 of p values, obtained using an
31.7%
13.3%
20.0%
13.3%
13.3%
20.0%
11.7%
0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0%
Inputs/Mechanization
Transport cost
Market
Mentors
Environmental protection
Diseases/Pests occurance
Others
[53]
“Independent Samples T-Test”; first between different groups of farmers and secondly different
case studies, for different information need types.
With the common 𝐻𝑖0: �̅�𝑖1 = �̅�𝑖2 where �̅�𝑖1 is the mean of first group or case study (Sector or
Cooperative) �̅�𝑖2 is the mean of the second group or case for a particular type of information
needs i. And for each 𝐻𝑖0, pi is calculated and compared to the significance level of α=0.05
(meaning a confidence interval of 95%).
Table 6: Difference assessment in information needs among different farmers
p values from Independent Samples T-Test with α=0.05
BETWEEN
GROUPS
WITHIN GROUPS
Individuals Cooperatives
Type of information needs pi value decision pi value decision pi value Decision
Inputs / Mechanization 0.000 Reject 1.000 Fail 0.232 Fail
Transport cost 0.000 Reject 1.000 Fail 0.001 Reject
Market availability 0.000 Reject 0.239 Fail 0.548 Fail
Sponsor/Mentors 0.041 Reject 0.034 Reject 0.028 Reject
Environmental protection 0.000 Reject 0.002 Reject 1.000 Fail
Diseases/Pests occurrence 1.000 Fail 0.122 Fail 1.000 Fail
Improved seeds and livestock 0.001 Reject 0.534 Fail 0.334 Fail
Others 0.000 Reject 0.419 Fail - -
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
N.B: When calculating differences between visited cooperatives, for the “others” type of
information needs, t cannot be computed because the standard deviations of both groups are 0,
and p cannot be calculated either.
Results from SPSS, presented in the above Table 6 allowed the researcher to make different
statistical decisions based on the p values. The decision is either “Reject H0” if p<α for A (first
group/case) and B (second group/case) and here the conclusion is that “There is a statistically
significant difference between A and B”; or “Fail to reject H0” if p>α for A and B and where the
conclusion is that “There is no statistically significant difference between A and B”.
[54]
As interpretation for the situation we have, the assessment of differences in information needs
between different groups of farmers (between individual and those operating in cooperatives),
reveals that apart from “Diseases/Pests occurrence”, all other types of information present a
difference in famers' needs.
Concerning the evaluation of differences within groups of farmers, we have two set of
information needs corresponding to two groups of farmers we have. The first set represents the
differences existing between case studies for individual farmers (here we consider only farmers
from Mukarange and Gacurabwenge Sectors), and the second set includes differences in
information needs between farmers operating in cooperatives (Imisugi and Abashirikabute).
The results show that for the two regions (for individual farmers), based on the first set, the
difference in information needs exists for “Sponsors / Mentors” and “Environmental protection”
information types.
Also from the Table 6, we learnt about differences existing between associations on which the
study was conduct, and these were observed for “Transport cost” and “Sponsors / Mentors”
relating information.
Results from the above statistical test, the researcher concludes that, even if can be provided
general trainings for all farmers, sometimes the information need to be tailored to region,
farmers’ category, activity or practice specific, according to the rate at which it is needed or to its
type.
4.2.5. Awareness and access to web technologies and information
After assessing the information needed by farmers, but before the researcher looks at the
adoption of ICT extension mode among them, he presents here to what extent farmers are aware
of ICT, how do they access web technologies and what information are they getting through
these. This is presented into four following points.
[55]
4.2.5.1. Information and Communication Technology (ICT)
The awareness of ICT might be studied among farmers, as a way comprising many types of
information dissemination mode and among others technologies using web tools. From farmer
respondents, this was evaluated as depicted in the following table:
Table 7: Respondent farmers’ awareness to ICT
AWARE FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE (%)
Yes 28 46.7%
No 32 53.3%
Total 60 100%
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
The Table 7 reveals the respondents’ awareness of ICT (Ikorana-buhanga n’Itumanaho), and as
results 46.7% of them agreed to know what ICT is, whereas 53.3% indicated to have never heard
about the term Information and Communication Technology and/or ICT or simply Ikorana-
buhanga n’Itumanaho in their life.
4.2.5.2. Internet awareness
From ICT, which comprises all Information and Communication Technologies, to Internet as
networks from which web tools can be accessed, the researcher tried then to figure out to what
extent farmers are aware of Internet.
Table 8: Respondent farmers’ awareness of Internet
AWARE FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Yes 34 56.7%
No 26 43.3%
Total 60 100%
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
The Table 8, the table above shows that 34 (56.7%) farmer respondents heard about internet
versus 26 (43.3%).
[56]
4.2.5.3. Access to telecentres
One of way to access the Internet and more specifically web tools in Rwandan rural areas is by
telecentres. Planned by GoR, these centres have been installed in all Districts, as said by CICA
expert, and as this was one of selection criteria for site to be visited for individual famers; the
survey was conducted in neighboring areas (in 1-2 km from respondent farmer’s house) to this
kind of centres. The researcher wanted to know whether the farmer knows the availability of
these centres and location of these in his/her region. From estimation by respondents, below are
distances to the nearest telecentre.
Figure 15: Respondents access to telecentres
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
From the total respondents on the Figure 15, 43.3% of respondents don’t know anything about
the availability telecentres in their regions, 23% said this centre to be at 1 km from their homes,
18.3% said it is situated in distance between 1-5 km, 6.7% indicated to be between 5-25 km and
finally 8.3% believe the nearest telecentre to be in a distance above 25 km far from their home.
4.2.5.4. Use of internet
The use of internet in rural areas is still low because of many parameters like insufficient
electrical energy, absent or weak internet connection coverage, less awareness of internet and
web technologies, no interest in information from internet for rural people (as this doesn’t
directly influence the household livelihood), and low level of literacy in rural areas. This was
observed among respondents as illustrated in the table below:
23.3%
18.3%
6.7%8.3%
43.3%
Less than 1 km
Between 1-5 km
Between 5-25 km
Above 25 km
Don't exist
[57]
Table 9: Respondent’s use of internet
USE INTERNET FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Yes 5 8.3%
No 55 91.7%
Total 60 100%
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
Only 5 respondents being 8.3% of the total questioned farmers have used at least once internet,
and up to 55 respondents, corresponding to 91.7% have not (Table 9).
4.2.6. Use and access to ICT extension information
4.2.6.1. Communication tools use
Rural farmers can get access to information, and this information can either be related to
agricultural activities or to any other domain. Means by which the rural people can get
information and the rate at which respondents have access to it, are presented in Figure 16.
Figure 16: Communication tools used by respondents
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
Meetings are the most used method to spread information among rural population. Farmer with
whom we discussed do attend them at a rate of 96.7% of the total respondents, followed by
91.7% who listen to radio and 90.0% owning and using a mobile phone (at least one member of
90.0%
3.3%
91.7%
23.3%
20.0%
96.7%
0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% 120.0%
Telephone
Post mail
Radio
TV/Video
Newspapers
Meeting
[58]
their house owns it). The lowest used ones include TV/Video watching, newspaper reading and
post mail at rates of 23.3%, 20.0% and 3.3% of respondents farmers respectively.
4.2.6.2. Use of ICT extension
The ICT extension being a way of providing agricultural information by ICT tools was assessed
along with its information usage to respondents.
Table 10: ICT Extension awareness and usage to respondent farmers
AWARE OF ICT EXTENSION FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Yes
Usa
ge Yes 10 16.7%
No 6 10.0%
No 44 73.3%
Total 60 100%
Source: (Primary data 2013)
The presented results in Table 10, show that among 60 farmers corresponding to 100%, from
who this research was conducted, only 26.7% (16.7% + 10.0%) of the respondents heard about
ICT extension, and among them only 16.7% of the total respondents use it for improving their
agricultural activities and other 10.0% of respondents even if having heard about it, do never use
it. The remaining 73.3% answered “No” to the awareness of ICT extension question.
4.2.6.3. Services from ICT extension
The above number of 16 respondents indicating to have known about ICT extension, have shared
with the researcher which services they use and their answers based on the number of
respondents who know a type of service provided through ICT extension, are presented in the
following chart.
[59]
Figure 17: ICT extension services known by respondents who are aware of ICT extension
services
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
By descendent order a rate of 37.5% of the 16 of respondents who are aware of ICT extension,
affirmed that governmental policies are disseminated by extension mode using ICT tools. These
are followed by 25.0% who know that markets for improved varieties and inputs for agricultural
practices, and for agricultural products can be available through ICT extension mode. The
agricultural related news service is passed through this mode as said by 18.8% of the 16, whereas
services like weather, audio-visual learning and advertisement or announcement are known to
pass through ICT extension at the same rate of 12.5% respondents who are aware of ICT
extension mode, for each; 6.3% agreed to know mentorship advices (and service providing) to
farmers are provided via these tools. And finally 6.3% mentioned that other services can be
provided through ICT extension.
4.2.7. Reception of web (cyber) extension mode in Rwanda
4.2.7.1. What have to be done?
This was the question asked to the respondent after being presented in few words the functions,
importance and objectives of the system. And from proposed answers, following results
summarize their understanding, reception and suggestions.
12.5%
18.8%
12.5%
25.0%
6.3%
37.5%
12.5%
6.3%
0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% 40.0%
Video/Audio learning
Document/Articles news
Weather forecast
Inputs/variety and Products market
Service provider/Mentors' advice
Agricultural GoR policies publication
Advertisement/Announcement
Other
[60]
Table 11: Reception and suggestion to the cyber extension from farmer respondents
SUGGESTION / ANSWER FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Focus on trainers 39 65.0%
Focus on farmers 15 25.0%
Cease to exist (use traditional mode) 0 0%
NGOs and GoR trainer to farmers 6 10.0%
Other 0 0%
Total 60 100%
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
On the list of 5 proposed answers for the research, as shown in Table 11, 65.0% of total farmers
respondents (60), wished the web application to be built may be meant to “focus on trainers”: Be
used by agronomist and extension agents trained (delegated by their Village or neighbors), and
these after collecting information needed by or related to their regions, they will come and
explain them to their colleagues or farmer due to their responsibilities (for agronomists).
Many respondents suggested this option based on the fact that even if they need information
from this kind of extension mode, not all farmers could be able to either read or understand the
message passed through this system, and that it is not easy to get enough computers for anyone
who wants to use it; then, the availability of farmer to go and browse on the internet during the
time he/she would be working can harm his/her agricultural activities. All these could limit usage
of the system, if focusing to the famer directly.
But 25 % wished the web use could be integrated into other agricultural training, for teaching
and encouraging the exchange of agricultural among different farmers. This group of
respondents worries the information could be altered by the intermediary, and then not be
keeping its originality than when reaching the farmer directly from the source.
10% of respondents prefer the GoR institutions and NGOs may improve their ways of
approaching the farmer, and provide agricultural information by direct contact with the farmer
rather than passing their message through ICT tools or other intermediaries.
[61]
But as observed in the Table 11,, no one was satisfied by the traditional mode of extension,
because farmers criticized that, they meet rarely extension agents (at least 2 times a year and
only during the planting seasons) and that the information got from their meeting (trainings) are
not followed up, to see whether these are well implemented on the field.
4.3. Extension agents
The data collected from Sector’s agronomist was for supplementing what has been taken from
farmers, but with more technical explanations.
The agricultural activities are practiced by 80% of the total population (the total being 27,871
habitants from Gacurabwenge and 26,000 habitants from Mukarange).
The main farming practices found in these regions visited were more concentrated in food crops:
Banana as a specialty for eastern Province (here we consider Mukarange Sector) for and Cassava
and potatoes are more grown in Southern Province (example made by Gacurabwenge Sector)
and some more general like crop beans, maize, coffee and sorghum, ground nut and peas,
vegetables and fruits like pineapple. Other crop not listed here are also grown at medium or low
adoption. And concerning the animal breeding, the more found in Rwanda are cattle, goats and
poultry in general, but at great number pigs, rabbit and a few sheep, ducks and turkeys can be
found.
The productivity depends on which region a crop was grown, and as was told by the agronomist
of Gacurabwenge Sector, there good productivity is observed on one hand, maize (4.3 T/ha),
cassava, sorghum and vegetables in general, on the other hand livestock, especially for improved
variety of animal (example made by cows). The great productivity for Mukarange Sector, as told
by Sector agronomist is more observed in banana and milk products.
Among different obstacles against the optimum agricultural productivity, one can say ignorance
of farmers and a number of people practicing agricultural activities not professionally but as a
recreation as explained by Gacurabwenge agronomist. For special case of Mukarange Sector, as
it is the general problem in Eastern Province, drought and Kirabiranya (disease for banana)
constitute one of serious obstacles.
[62]
Since longtime ago, GoR has helped at improving the rural agricultural sector, by designing
agricultural related policies and programs. Some example of them, as revealed by agronomists
we talked to, are Land Use Consolidation, Girinka Munyarwanda, Akarima k’igikoni, CIP,
Agasozi ndatwa; and other special and local programs like Rondereza (IDP Project/Nyagatovu),
green house for women associations in Mukarange Sector. A specialty for Gacurabwenge Sector
in local agricultural development program includes what is called “Inka y’akaguru”, this being
more similar to Girinka, but when the cow gives birth to the little cow, the farmer gives the
mother cow (rather than giving the little cow) to his/her colleague, and this is fast to reach more
farmers than Girinka.
As these technicians are direct intermediaries between the GoR and farmers, so the evaluation of
information access to them was done, and as they told the researcher, they have access to input
availability, environmental protection through MINAGRI, REMA (District environmental
committee for Gacurabwenge and protection of Muhazi lac for Mukarange Sector), access to
markets, diseases and pests occurrence and finally seeds/livestock improved varieties. But also
more clarification needed on how does the population get information, they mentioned meeting,
radio, television and telephone means.
For the use of internet and awareness of telecentres, they affirmed to know about these centres
and their location; and that they do use internet for their work, at almost 5 days a week. The
information they get concerns mostly of administrative reports from Districts, various news and
sometimes news relating to the agricultural sector. The most of this agricultural information got
from internet are delivered from RAB, District, MINAGRI websites. Apart from online
extension information, some other previous training they got was asked by the researcher. And as
resulting answer trainings got were for banana, maize, cassava production, some animal breeding
practices and to cure and prevent some diseases of agricultural products. For these they thank,
RAB for its contribution to these trainings. But also new trainings are desired, like ones for
fighting against diseases (Kirabiranya being an example on Mukarange site) and different
farming systems, and some institutions from which they wish training, include RAB, RIAM,
CICA, etc.
[63]
About suggestion about the new system of extension (Cyber extension), they suggested this
could focus on agricultural extension agents (Sector or Village ones), and these will explain what
have been learned to other farmers in their region (neighborhoods).
They also suggested the system may provide more technical training rather than flash daily news,
may be able to sort news and articles meant to a particular region and agricultural activity and it
may talk about newly introduced agricultural commodities in Rwanda.
4.4. Extension institutions in Rwanda
After the researcher visited farmers as implementers of agricultural policies and information, and
field technicians (Sectors’ agronomists) as intermediary actors for agricultural information
dissemination, he requested for an appointment and administered a short interview to different
experts from governmental institutions acting in extension services among others RAB and
CICA who sometimes work as policy planners.
RAB:
From the RAB expert, we learn that “Rwanda agricultural Board” is a governmental institution
established to provide agricultural extension and services in other to improve agricultural service
delivery, its mission being the development of agricultural and animal husbandry through their
reform, and using modern methods in crop and animal production, research, agriculture
extension, education and training of farmers in new technologies to improve livelihood.
The activities of RAB include provide support to rural farmers for commodity adoption and
farming and livestock productivity. The farmer visits by RAB extension team use to be
conducted in planting seasons.
RAB as a governmental institution have many partners. As we have been told by the expert,
some of them are local like REMA (Rwanda Environmental Management Agency), MINIRENA,
MINALOC, RCA (Rwanda Cooperative Agency), CICA, RSSP for marshland and terraces
cultivation, and other international NGOs like IFDC, World Bank, BTC for transforming
agricultural by FFS and extension services; ASARECA (Association for Strengthening
Agriculture Research for East and Central Africa), FARA (Forum for Agricultural Research for
[64]
Africa), DFID (Department for International Development), E.U (European Union), FAO (Food
and Agricultural Organization) acting in empowering farmer organization projects, ICRAFT
(International Centre for Research in Agroforestry / World Agroforestry Centre), IRRI
(International Rice Research Institute) and JAICA (Japan International Cooperative Agency) for
rice cultivation, CIP (Crop International Program) for potatoes cultivation and finally IFAD in
water shed projects.
The problem of database for RAB reports and books, available for agricultural research, and a
too slow internet connection constitute a problem for keeping agriculture information safe. The
wish for the general extension services is to prepare special agricultural training for a particular
region, and for all commodities grown in Rwanda. And for this new extension mode he
suggested, it may be updated regularly and designed to help the monitoring and evaluation of
agricultural information and its exchange in two ways. Hence with RAB information could reach
the beneficiaries easily.
CICA:
Agricultural Information and Communication Centre (CICA) aims at collect, produce, process,
adapt, store and disseminate agricultural information among different stakeholders.
The information is collection from different institutes, projects and SPIU, processing is the
conversion of soft copies into pdf format files, and uploaded (stored) to the AMIS (Agricultural
Management Information System) website or in the library as hard copies. The adaption concern
at edit it in a more farmer friendly language, and distribute it (dissemination).
This Centre comprises 5 departments:
- Library (Web based and Hard copies),
- ICT (AMIS), also having the esoko.gov.rw website (for providing market information for
different agricultural products in Rwanda)
- Extension material development (in simple language to farmer understanding)
- Audio-Visual material / Studio (preparation of audio and learning which are passed on
different radios e.g. Radio Rwanda on Tuesday and Thursday, and Rwanda Television.
Most of these lessons are passed during the planting seasons).
[65]
- And GIS for assessing a good soil for particular crop, these helping new investors to
invest in agricultural domain in Rwanda
Relative initiatives to CICA and local partners are:
- CCI (Centre Communautaire d’Information) under PAPUSTA, KWAMP and PRICE.
Today these centres are 9 in 9 different Districts.
- BDC (Business Development Centre) in partnership between RDB, PSF and local
government. These are working as RITA telecentres, and are distributed in all Districts of
Rwanda.
Wishes got from CICA expert for what may done to improve the agricultural extension, is to
make use of these telecentres at the profit of the rural people (mostly farmers). And the
partnership, she suggested can be created between CICA and our system is, as may do other
similar systems, to work together with CICA, as a public institution and sometimes have
access to different actors and information we need as one stop center, and allocate different
types of information to disseminate and responsibilities among those systems; this to avoid
the duplication of information, and allow an ordered reference to anyone in need of particular
agricultural information without getting lost.
From previous experiences, the CICA expert mentioned some challenges they have faced, the
more crucial is the financial based one where was difficult to reach the farmer and that
printed document are still few to satisfy were needed; but was convinced extension mode is
applicable, any tome it will share a true and important information.
The main partners with CICA are FAO, BTC, World Bank and RCA.
Having presented and discussed the data from the field, the following paragraphs will consist
of the description of the Website designed by the researcher that will ease the interaction of
different stakeholders. In addition, the present website will help to get rid of the main
challenges faced by different people involved in agricultural sector in Rwanda.
[66]
4.5. Rwanda Online Agro-Advisory System
The “Rwanda Online Agro-Advisory System” or simply ROAAS is a newly created online
system with an aim to link different agricultural stakeholders acting in extension services in
Rwanda to help rise the farmer agricultural productivity.
Its idea coming from different reading, experience and performed basing on results and
suggestion from the current study, this system could also be an example for future similar
initiatives.
4.5.1. Target users
The information from this system is meant to reach the farmer (as target user), for help to raise
his/her agricultural productivity, but as a great number of these can neither read nor write, it will
be better to empower and focus the online trainings and information to the extension agents, and
this later will teach what they would learn to targeted farmers.
4.5.2. Mission
The ROAAS mission is summarized in three points, which are to be:
a. Community
Through the system, different actors either national or international are held together for
supporting agricultural advisory activities in Rwanda.
b. School
The system, being free and open to anyone, it will contribute in the capacity building of farmers,
public and private institutions’ program and activity follow up, and research sources, with more
accurate and clear agricultural information exchange from different users.
c. Portal
Institution, NGOs, other communities or individuals, will be able to link their own system,
website, blogs or other online or field addresses, to the current system, for their clients.
[67]
4.5.3. Diffusion means
For generating more traffic (users) for the system, different ways of diffusion have been adopted:
a. Social Network websites
Today, the system can be accessed by its Facebook page, Twitter account, Google plus account
and Intashyo page.
b. ROAAS online (web) application
The proper website of the System was created will be accessible online (from
www.roaas.intashyo.net). It was designed specifically to contribute to answering problems faced
in Rwanda agricultural extension.
The next section deals more with the application section of the system, and looks it as it was the
proper system.
4.5.4. Members
Anyone using this system is considered as a member of the community, and 2 categories are
identified based on their roles, these include:
4.5.4.1. Beneficiaries or Actors/Stakeholders and system needs
This category comprises members with role “User”, to mean any one benefiting from the system
as one of any stakeholder type. Within this different groups based on type of information need
and provision, are:
a. Governmental institutions
Governmental policy designer and planner institutions will need to use this system as one way to
evaluate the need from farmers and rural extension agents, publish and follow the
implementation of agricultural policies and trainings. And will publish new information
concerning agricultural domain.
[68]
b. Private institutions, national and international NGOs and Service Providers
Private institutions being in partnership with Public ones, the system will ease them the provision
of good services in the agricultural extension. Therefore, they will benefit from it as way of
reaching their clients, advertise their activities and provide their support to their target
population.
c. Products market dealers and Input suppliers
Many farmers, as learn from this research, claim to not have access to markets information for
their agriculture product and inputs, so this will help market dealers and input suppliers to
communicate with their clients farmers.
d. Mentors and Sponsors in agricultural sector
Apart from extension institutions, some individuals can be available for assisting the technicians
and farmers, either by mentorship or financial support. Through ROAAS, they will be accessed,
and from any place and time.
e. Researchers
Many researchers complain for not having access to electronic documentation concerning
agricultural domain in Rwanda. With help of this system, more documents and reports will be
available. And these researchers can post their research results for later use via the system.
f. Field technicians
Field technicians will be able to compare the situation in their region with other region, contact
the training providers, learn about commodities grow in their region, all for delivering a clear
and accurate information to the local farmers.
g. Individual and Farmers Cooperatives
By farmer, one should understand any one practicing agricultural and/or animal husbandry
activities. These being the lowest level information beneficiaries, they can keep in touch between
each other as individual or grouped (association) farmers, or with other actors.
[69]
h. Others
No one is forbidden to visit, comment or use the information set public to the system, hence even
those who are not actors in the agricultural extension services can browse the site either for
documentation, suggestions, comments as do actors in the extension services. (farmers,
agricultural technicians and institutions, etc.)
4.5.4.2. Regulators
Regulators or stuff on the system is a group of few people with roles of “Moderator” and
“Administrator”. They have responsibility of keeping information safe, in accordance with
website Privacy and Terms of Services, and provide technical support on the system.
a. Moderators
- They assist the users who meet difficulties of using the system
- They can approve or block comments, articles and users abusing the system
- They can modify, articles, comment or profile description of users to meet the
understanding or users and privacy of the website.
- They are in charge of posting system updates on the Social Network websites
b. Administrators
- Are allowed all Moderators’ roles, and moreover
- They can modify the structure, core files and content of the site
- They allocate (promote or demote) members from different roles and actor types.
4.5.5. Features and design
By features the researcher means any way used to ease the interaction among users on the
system, these include:
4.5.5.1. Membership and promotion/demotion
Unless you are registered on the site, you will be considered as Guest when visiting it and you
will be restricted to some features that a registered member has access to.
[70]
a. Registration
For better enjoyment of the website and more interaction with other members, anyone can
register for membership. This is done through the Signup form found on the site. From there, one
fills the fields as required for creating his own profile and being identified. Also there, one could
choose, the type of profile he/she wants according to which actor type he/she belongs to more
(whether representing a public or private institution, NGO, group of farmers, is a mentor or
sponsor, individual farmer, etc.). If the actor type field is not specified, the default membership
will be considered (the individual user one).
The created profile will be accessed by entering chosen username and password in the write
place (present on the home page). Also from the profile created, any member can be contacted by
other members, and emailed for request, answers or other discussion.
Any member wishing will be able to change his profile type, if needed.
b. Promotion/Demotion
In addition to these types concerning the User role, when decided necessary by the Administrator
can promote any user to be a Moderator, or demoted from Moderator role to a simple user (in
any user type).
4.5.5.2. Section and region focus
From wishes and suggestion of this study’s respondents, the website content can be browsed
focused on a particular region (Province) or agricultural activity (agriculture or animal
husbandry). These will help to narrow the search or the browse in a small set of information as
specified.
4.5.5.3. Services
Different services are described through the services menus. A list concerning some of them is
available, and from each item, one can learn how to access that service.
[71]
a. Input service
This part include articles where are explained how can farmer have access to different
agricultural inputs in Rwanda, how these are used, and who can assist them through the usage of
these inputs.
b. Market service
Markets for agricultural product are available by several ways. This section contains a number of
articles talking about markets for agricultural products.
c. Assistance (advisory) service
The assistance or Advisory services include the mentorship assured by specialized experts in a
certain field and available to assist the farmer producers of product in which the expert is
specialized. Different articles and links to profiles are available in this section.
d. Weather forecasting service
One of most needed service in agricultural practices is the weather forecast, on ROAAS, this
service is assured by linking to more specialized institutions, and by explaining how to access
and use this kind of information to beneficiaries of the system.
4.5.5.4. Practices and products
By product, the researcher wanted to mean the item types included in one agricultural practice.
For example, within fruits’ practice, one will find pineapple, oranges, passion fruits, lemon, etc.
Here articles and news post concerning a particular practice or product will be displayed.
4.5.5.5. Posting (news, article and announcements)
a. News post
Day to day flash news can help in presenting the agricultural situation of the country. That is
why this section has been created and any registered member can post any news concerning
[72]
his/her region and practice. This could be a good way to share experiences and thoughts from
different members.
b. Article post
In the previous sections, we talked more about articles, and these constitute the ways of
publishing written texts. Such texts are available for being read on the site. This constitutes one
of major functions of this website. Different articles are then edited, and approved to be
published, and these will be grouped in “Services” or “Practices” according to the tags this was
edited with. Also the latest articles’ titles will be listed on the home page.
c. Announcement post
Agriculture announcement will be published on the website by institutions, grouped farmers or
individual farmers, but this should be approved by the Moderators.
4.5.5.6. Downloadable tutorials (media and documents)
It is good to have different tutorials and lessons and browse them through website pages.
However, it is better to have a way of keeping them for future use.
With the downloadable tutorials function, anyone can download either video, audio, documents,
files available on the website, and keep it on a hard drive (Flash disk, CD, DVD) or even print it
on hard copies.
4.5.5.7. Question and Answer function
Another good way of interaction between stakeholders through the ROAAS system is done by
posting questions and being answered publically.
For using this feature, the person who submits the question through the question form can be a
registered member or not. And his/her question will be published on the website in the QA
(Question and Answer) section waiting for being answered. For answering to a question, it is
required to be registered and logged so that the answer will be attributed to its author as was the
question.
[73]
This feature help different users, taking from previous experiences and problems met by their
colleagues to find what have been answers on similar questions to theirs, or ask their own. This
will contribute to the information flow among different stakeholders and will help to share a
point of view on a particular subject.
4.5.5.8. Agribusiness advertisement
Different actors wishing to advertise their products or activities will be allowed to, through
different ads placements on the website. This could help to find markets for their products,
calling for more consumers/clients.
4.5.5.9. Agriculture Development programs
A menu for agro-development programs is present on the website; this contains a list of national
and local agriculture programs. Each menu item leading to a page containing articles describing
this program, and it is related to articles, news items, document, audio and video files.
Figure 18: Information flow in ROAAS
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
[74]
Table 12: Different features and member types with their roles (or actions) on ROAAS system Unauthentified users
Guest user can only browse on the system Authentified Users
Different member will be To interact between each other
Core pages Tutorials Contacting Use of the system Actors
-Home -Contact form -About us -TOS and Privacy -FAQ
-Video learning -Audio learning -Documents (files)
Able to contact other actors or the site administration for help or discussion
<< A, B, C Government
<< A, B, C, D Private/NGOs
<< B, D, E Suppliers/Markets
<< A, B, C Service providers
Commenting and Posting << B, D Mentors
Post information and different ideas on the published posts and tutorials.
<< B, C, F, G Researchers
Posts << B, C, F, G Field technicians
News About different agriculture events in Rwanda and abroad
<< C, F, G Cooperatives
<< B, C, F, G Farmers
Article Include lesson about practices and techniques in agriculture
<< B, G Others
A B C D E F G
-Follow up of policy and programs -Provide help -Interact with others -Target beneficiaries -Find clients and/or products -Learn on different practices and techniques Request for assistance
announcements From different actors and meant to the system audience
Ask and answer
One can ask, and answer on question asked and set public, or if a good answer was given, he/she can give more suggestions on this question
Questions/answers Answer and question about agriculture activities are viewed
Advertisement Announce about markets, products and actors helping to rise agriculture productivity
Administration team: Helps to keep the system safe, secure and follow the privacy and terms of use
N.B: Administration owns Authentified, and Authentified owns Guest (Unauthentified) permissions (authorizations)
Source: (Primary data, 2013)
[75]
4.5.6. System contribution to the extension services
As from the above descriptions of different actors and features on the website, as a summary
through this system we want to take part in extension domain as follow:
- Once trainings will be delivered to technicians these ones will be able to assist their local
farmers and this will help in developing the agriculture at farm level, and other
stakeholders (NGOs, private institutions, individual and grouped farmers …) will benefit
from trusted information passed from the system to improve their activities.
- The amount spent in extension services (moving from place to place for trainers and
training equipment cost – white/green/black board, chalks, markers,…-) will now help in
developing other activities or other sectors.
- As sometimes it was said this or that couldn’t be done because of a little time, now many
things could be done, without any problem (as this will be done online).
- Also skilled personnel are now available to many people, so the advantage will be a rapid
apprentice which will lead to speed up the agriculture development and the country in
general.
- Before this extension model, one might need to ask for help or give support and this with
no success because of either unavailability of advisors or unable to meet the concerned
people in a certain domain, but now a great range of stakeholders will be available and
any one can have more chances to get the support he/she needs from the community.
- Sometimes books, paper and other hard copy records were lost or damaged by humidity,
insects,… but with this new way of data stocking one could be sure nothing can harm
his/her information, and that he/she can have access on it anytime he/she wants.
- Now the information is shared online, and anyone if needed, can know what is the
situation in other parts of the country, and then this can help in preparing market,
provision of input as well as helping others who need you.
- Some regions in Rwanda are having overproduction in one commodity while in others
this product is deficient, so this method can be a good way of making known where the
market can be conducted (concentrated).
[76]
- Apart from conducting a survey on field, no one couldn’t know what the extension agents
and farmers need, but now this constitute a solution where one can know what will be
needed on the field, just by information collected from the website.
- The design and elaboration of policies are not enough, because without following up how
these are being implemented, it could be a work with no result. Therefore, we expect that
this system will give a view of what stage is reached, what has been inconvenient and
what is now needed to reach the objectives of those policies.
- Many ways of getting and keeping information are available, keeping written paper is the
most used in official information but one can wonder on how for example, can be kept a
voice of cow suffering of a vocal cords,… So the good way of this is to have a recorded
voice, and if possible an illustrative video.
[77]
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1. Conclusion
The current research untitled “Agriculture Development through Online Agro-Advisory System in
Rwanda” was carried out based on Mukarange, Gacurabwenge, Kinyinya (Abashirikabute
cooperative) and Nduba (Imisugi cooperative) case studies, about how the extension services are
assured in Rwanda, the flow of agricultural information, and how these services could be
improved by use of online tools. From the study results, we got following findings, answering
the research questions.
The information reaches the farmer either from his/her colleagues, previous experience from
natural or traditional cognition or by trainings from different extension services.
As some extension services are delivered to different stakeholders in the agricultural domain
(extension agents, individual farmers and farmers’ cooperatives), from this research we learned
that a number of 20% and 30% of respectively individual and grouped farmers (cooperatives)
have received at least once agricultural trainings. Subject of these were mainly farming activities,
diseases and pest occurrence, seed and livestock improved varieties, Input and product markets,
and environmental protection.
The impact of these trainings touching the farmers’ by different development measurements:
economic, intellectual and raising his/her agricultural production, these were not as sufficient as
were planned because only 35.7% of respondents farmers testified to have been satisfied and
other 64.3% were not. From their views, they suggest to be given more trainings where mostly
concerning farming and animal breeding techniques, market for their products and inputs. But
also as was presented from test of different information need rate, it reveals the differences
existing among different regions, farmers’ category and commodity based group for a particular
information type. Among extension stakeholders, the more wished to provide the information by
the respondents are governmental institutions, like RAB, REMA, RIAM, etc.
One way of responding to problem met in extension services is the use of online tools, beginning
from the assessment of the web technologies aware and use, the study showed: 46.7% knows
what ICT is, 56.7% are aware of internet, 18.7% knows exactly where the telecentres are located
[78]
in their regions, and only 8.3% have used at least once the internet. From here, as the research
proceeded with the evaluation of the communication using other tools, presented the most used
ones to be meetings, radio listening and mobile telephone, but also few TV/Video, newspaper
and post mail are used. Only 16.7% of respondents use the information got from ICT tools for
improving their agricultural activities, by services like Audio/visual learning, documents/articles
news, weather forecast, markets for agricultural inputs and products, mentorship, agricultural
policy publications and announcement.
With the introduction of the new extension model to the farmers, 90% appreciated the new
initiative, and have suggested differently how this can serve the targeted farmer. On the question
on who to focus the information, 65.0% of respondents wish the online training could be first
provided to extension agents, and later, once coming back in their Villages or Sectors these
agents will share the information got with their colleagues or farmers in their home regions. But
25.0% wished could be directly delivered to target farmers. The 10.0% not wishing the adoption
of the new extension mode, suggested the governmental and NGO’s experts would come at the
field to meet the farmers and teach them directly without the intervention of ROAAS system or
any other agent.
From different experience in agricultural information dissemination shared by governmental
institutions interviewed (CICA and RAB/Extension department), we learned how much cyber
extension is needed, by the fact that it can help to the storage and access of a huge amount of
information about agricultural practices, markets, inputs…, and it will link different stakeholders
acting in agricultural extension domain, at the service of the farmer. Moreover, this mode of
extension service delivery will be applied successfully as this is needed and different ICT
infrastructure is being developed all over the country and even in the rural areas (example made
by BTC installed by RDB in partnership with MINICT and local administration).
The building of the Online Web Application subsequent from this research is believed to be
contributing to the extension services, and with help of other different actors this could help the
farmer to raise the agricultural productivity, developing themselves, their families and the
country as a whole.
[79]
5.2. Recommendations
Different recommendations were formulated based on investigator observations and research
results:
To the Rwanda government
- The governmental policy makers may continue empowering the agriculture transformation,
through the design and making of new agriculture driven policies
- The ICT sector may be developed to meet the need of all people living conditions and for
their wellbeing.
- Rwandan government may continue welcoming the investors in rural development activities,
and where agriculture needs to empowered by different ways, including provision of
agriculture knowledge.
To ISAE, other Universities and Research Institutions
- They may support agricultural researches, because from researchers they learn how to
improve the agriculture sector, and new techniques will be developed, once these are done
well.
- Even if they are called research institutions, it was found that many research data and reports
are not kept safe for next documentation, so a way of storing this could be use of electronic
library, which could be accessed by any one and without getting damaged.
- The research results may be presented to the concerned actors and not only kept in libraries,
because as is the case for agricultural extension service we have today, this could improve
the life of population from which the research was conducted.
Extension stakeholders
- If any extension stakeholder has any information to share, any extension stakeholder may
share it, either by traditional methods or through online ones, aiming that this could reach as
many people as possible in as needed.
- For gaining more clients’ confidence, it is better to provide an accurate and updated
agricultural information to beneficiaries.
[80]
- Farmers may follow more trainings and adopt new agricultural technologies, as these are
designed to raise their agricultural productivity.
Other Researchers and similar initiatives
- To other researchers, the investigator recommended to make further study on the agricultural
sector, and use of other ICT tools rather than web application
- The different researchers and other agricultural information publishers may combine their
efforts to prevent the duplication or confuse the information to beneficiaries as different
versions of same information can rise from different authors.
[81]
REFERENCE
Ahuja, Vivek. 2011. Cyber Extension: A Convergence of ICT and Agricultural Development.
Amity School of Business, Amity University Uttar Pradesh, Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Noida, Uttar
Pradesh : Global Media Journal, 2011. SSN 2249-5835.
AKER, Jenny C. 2011. Dial “A” for Agriculture: A Review of Information and Communication
Technologies for Agricultural Extension in Developing Countries. Economics Department and
Fletcher School, Tufts University. Medford : s.n., 2011.
blogs.rnw.nl. 2008. Private FM radio stations start in Rwanda next month. blogs.rnw.nl.
[Online] 2008. [Cited: March 1, 2013.] http://www.blogs.rnw.nl/medianetwork/private-fm-
radio-stations-start-in-rwanda-next-month.
BSG-Psychology. 2012. Research Methods: Observation. gsspsychology.wordpress.com.
[Online] 2012. [Cited: March 23, 2013.] http://www.gsspsychology.wordpress.com/research-
method-observation.
Cantore, Nicola. 2011. The Crop Intensification Program in Rwanda: A sustainability analysis.
London : Overseas Development Institute,Investment and Growth Program, 2011.
CICA-ICT. About E-Soko. E-Soko. [Online] Minagri. [Cited: February 12, 2013.]
http://www.esoko.gov.rw/esoko/Dashboard/Login.aspx?
DashboardId=4&dash=true&Login=true.
CICA-Library. CICA/MINAGRI-Library. eRAILS. [Online] eRAILS. [Cited: February 12,
2013.] http://www.erails.net/RW/erails-training/cicaminagri-library/.
climate-data.org. Climate data for: Kayonza - climate-data.org. climate-data.org. [Online]
AmbiWeb GmbH. [Cited: March 20, 2013.] http://en.climate-data.org/location/56064/.
Demiryurek, Kursat, et al. Agricultural Information Systems and Communication Networks:
The case of dairy farmers in the Samsun Province of Turkey. IR Information Research. [Online]
[Cited: February February, 2013.] http://www.informationr.net/ir.
DFID(Gasabo), EU and United Nations Rwanda. 2011. EICV3 District Profile Kigali -
Gasabo. Gasabo : National Institute of Staristics Rwanda, 2011.
DFID(Kamonyi), EU and United Nations Rwanda. 2011. EICV3 District Profile South -
Kamonyi. Kamonyi : National Institute of Staristics Rwanda, 2011.
digsitevalue.org. 2013. DigSiteValue for Agriculture.com. Dig Site Value. [Online] Dig Site
Value, 2013. [Cited: March 4, 2013.] http://www.digsitevalue.org/s/agriculture.com.
[82]
Dzidonu, Clement. 2010. An Analysis of the Role Of ICTs to Achieving the MDGs. Accra :
Accra Institute of Technology (AIT), 2010.
ehow.com. Definition Online Service. www.ehow.com. [Online] E How.
http://www.ehow.com/facts_7341095_definition-online-service_.html.
Gakuru, Mucemi, Winters, Kristen and Stepman, Francois. 2009. Inventory of Innovative
Farmer Advisory Services using ICTs. s.l. : FARA, 2009.
Hansra, B.S, et al. 2008. Agricultural Extension Systems: Issues and Approaches. Vellanad,
India : Concept Publishing Company, 2008. ISBN (10): 81-8069-502-6, ISBN (13): 978-81-
8069-502-5.
IEEE-Xplore. 2013. User centered Method. IEEE Xplore Digital Library. [Online] IEEE, 2013.
[Cited: March 12, 2013.]
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/login.jsp?tp=&arnumber=5764153&url=http%3A%2F%2Fieeexplo
re.ieee.org%2Fxpls%2Fabs_all.jsp%3Farnumber%3D5764153.
ifad.org. 1995-2013. Gathering, Managing and Communicating Information. ifad.org. [Online]
1995-2013. [Cited: June 17, 2013.] http://www.ifad.org/evaluation/guide/6/6.htm.
Invomtech. 2012. Services. Invomtech. [Online] 2012. [Cited: March 15, 2013.]
http://www.invomtech.com/services.aspx.
KAYONZA, District. About the District, Documents, Environment. Kayonza District. [Online]
Kayonza District. [Cited: March 12, 2013.] http://www.kayonza.gov.rw.
Kothari, C.R. 2004. Reserch Methodology: Methods and Techniques. New Delhi : New Age
International (P) Ltd., Publishers, 2004. ISBN (13) 978-81-224-2488-1.
Lanthier, Elizabeth. 2002. Questionnaire. Psychology Research Methods. [Online] Nothern
Virginia Community College, 2002. [Cited: March 4, 2013.]
http://nvcc.edu/home/elanthier/methods/questionnaire.htm.
Lemma, Fraol. 2009. The Role of ICT on Agricultural Knowledge Management Challenges and
Opportunities in Ethiopia. Unity University. Addis Ababa : s.n., 2009. MBA Thesis.
Mack, Natasha, et al. 2005. Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector’s Field Guide.
North Carolina : Family Health International, 2005. ISBN 0-939704-98-6.
Markets-Inclusive-Monitor. 2011. Monitor Inclusive Markets: Africa Business Models Mobile
Enabled. 2011.
[83]
May, Julian, Karugia, Joseph and Ndokweni, Mimi. 2007. Information and Communication
Technologies and Agricultural Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: Transformation and
Employment Generation. KwaZulu-Natal : University of KwaZulu-Natal, 2007.
McIntyre, Beverly D., et al. 2009. Agriculture at a Crossroads: International Assessment of
Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development . Washington, D.C. : Island
Press, 2009. ISBN 978-1-59726-538-6 (cloth : alk. paper), ISBN 978-1-59726-539-3 (pbk. : alk.
paper).
Meinzen-Dick, Ruth, et al. 2011. Engendering agricultural research, development and
extension. Washington, DC : Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data, 2011. ISBN
978-0-89629-190-4 (alk. paper).
MINAGRI. 2009. National Agricultural Extension Strategy. Kigali : MINAGRI, 2009.
MINECOFIN. 2007. Economic Development & Poverty Reduction Strategy 2008 - 2012.
Kigali : Minister of Finance and Economic Planning, 2007.
MINICT. 2011. Rwanda ICT Strategic and Action Plan (NICI III – 2015). Kigali : MINICT,
2011.
NISR. 2013. District Baseline Survey. National Institute of Statistics in Rwanda. [Online] NISR,
2013. [Cited: November 13, 2012.] www.statistics.gov.rw/survey-period/Districts-baseline-
survey-2008.
Nnoung, Andre M., Bohn, Andrea B. and Swanson, Burton E. 2011. Rwanda Country
Profile. Agriculture Extension an Advisory Services. 2011.
Patil, V. C., et al. 2011. Web Based Agricultural Extension In India. Dharwad, India :
University Of Agricultural Sciences, 2011.
Siraj, Mahrukh. 2012. A Model for ICT based Services for Agriculture Extension-Phase-II .
Rawalpindi : CABI, 2012.
Staatz , John M. 1998. Workshop on Structural Transformation in Africa. Food Security Group.
[Online] Michigan State University, 1998. [Cited: April 03, 2013.]
http://www.fsg.afre.msu.edu/ag_transformation/Def_Trans.htm.
Stienen, Jac, Bruinsma, Wietse and Neuman, Frans. 2007. How ICT can make a difference in
agricultural livelihoods. The Hague, Netherlands : The International Institute for
Communication and Development, 2007.
Umali, Dina L. and Schwartz, Lisa. 1994. Public and Private Agricultural Extension Beyond
Traditioinal Frontiers. Washington, D.C. : The World Bank, 1994. ISBN 0-8213-2803-4.
[84]
UNDP-Ethiopia. 2011. Promoting ICT based agricultural knowledge management to increase
production and productivity of smallholder farmers in Ethiopia. s.l. : UNDP, 2011.
World-Bank. 2011. ICT IN AGRICULTURE Connecting Smallholders to Knowledge, Networks,
and Institutions. Washington, DC : The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
/ The World Bank, 2011.
—. 2011. Rwanda Economic Update: Seeds For Higher Growth. Kigali : Spring Edition, 2011.
[85]
APPENDICES
Appendix I: Major Actors in Agriculture Extension System and their Channels of Delivery
Source: (Umali, et al., 1994 p. 8)
[86]
Appendix II: Independent Samples T-Test (Between Farmers' categories)
Appendix III: Independent Samples T-Test (Within Farmers' categories, Cooperatives)
[87]
Appendix IV: Independent Samples T-Test (Within Farmers' categories, Individuals)
[88]
Appendix V: Questionnaire I (System’s needs for farmers)
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE I (System’s needs for farmers)
INTRODUCTION:
My name is NIYIGENA Gildas, student in 5th year Rural Development and Agri-Business at ISAE RUBILIZI; I am conducting a
research on the “Agriculture Development through Online Agro-Advisory (Web-based) System” on different sites (Case
studies) in Rwanda.
For better accomplishment of this study I will be grateful for your contribution, answering to a few questions below. Collected
information will be kept private and confidential for this research.
0. SHEET IDENTIFICATION I. INTERVIEWEE’S IDENTIFICATION
Date of visit: d d m m y y y y 1. Names:
Questionnaire number: 2. Age: 3. Sex: male Female
Site District 4.Marital status: Single
Sector Married
Cell Widow(er)
Village Divorced
II. LEVEL OF EDUCATION III. PROFESSION
5. How many years of education?
a. Never attended school at all 7. What is your profession?
a. Farmer
b. Not completed primary b. Trainer (agronomist agent)
c. Completed primary (6 years) c. Merchant
d. Not completed ordinary level d. Other
e. Completed ordinary level (9 years) 8. Which activities do you do? Yes No
f. Not completed secondary a. Farming
g. Completed secondary (12 years) b. Animal breeding
h. Not completed university c. Training to farmer
i. Completed university (Bac. Or A0) d. Other
6. Have you ever followed any other education program?
a. Never attended other program 9. Which practice(s) do you do? Yes No
b. Technical education a. Cereals
c. Artistic education b. Vegetables
d. Other c. Legumes
IV. TRAINING AND VISIT d. Tubers
11. Have you attended any agricultural training? Yes No e. Roots
f. Fruits
12. (If 11 is Yes) Did it include …? Yes No g. Cow
a. Farming activities h. Goats
b. Market information i. Sheep
c. Disease eradication j. Pigs
d. New variety publication k. Rabbit
e. Environmental protection l. Poultry
f. Other 10. What is the size of your property?
a. Below 0.5ha (exclusive)
13. (If 11is Yes) Is … one of expected impact? Yes No b. Between 0.5-1ha (exclusive)
a. Agricultural production c. Above 1ha
b. Disease development IV. TRAINING AND VISIT (Continued)
c. Economic development 16. Do you ever get information on …? Yes No
d. Other a. Inputs availability
14. (If 11is Yes) Was the impact of these training(s) sufficient?
Yes No b. Cost of transport
c. Access to markets
15. Which other trainings (visits) do you need? (Explain more)
d. Access to transports and mentors
e. Environmental protection
f. Disease and pest occurrence
g. Seeds/Livestock improved varieties
[89]
V. WEB BASED SYSTEM COMPREHENSION VI. ICT EXTENSION
17. Have you heard about ICT? Yes No 22. Do you know what ICT extension is? Yes No
18. Have you heard about internet? Yes No 23. (If 22 is Yes) Have you ever used it? Yes No
19. How far is the nearest telecentre from your home?
a. Less than 1km (exclusive) 24. (If 23 is Yes) Have used these services of it? Yes No
b. Between 1km – 5km (exclusive) a. Technical Videos and Audios learning
c. Between 5km – 25km (exclusive) b. Technical Documents and written articles
d. Above 25km c. Weather
e. No where d. Markets information
20. Do you use internet? Yes No e. Input information and use (application)
f. Service provider offers
21. (If 20 is Yes) In what do you use internet? Yes No g. Technical and mentors advices forum
a. Email h. GoR policy implementation and extension
b. Information / Research i. Agri-business advertisement
c. Entertainment j. Other
VII. OTHER COMMUNICATION METHODS VIII. INTERVIEWEE POINT OF VIEW
25. Do you communicate by these tools? Yes No 25. After this the small introduction on web-extension, how do you wish may be?
a. It may focus on field extension agents
a. Telephones b. It may focus directly to farmers
b. Post mail box c. Cease to exist, we’ll only use traditional ones.
c. Radio
d. Television / Video d. Cease, GoR/NGOs may train farmers on field
e. Newspapers
f. Meetings e. Other
26. What advices may you give to improve this idea?
THANK YOU FOR YOUR KIND ATTENTION!
[90]
Appendix VI: Questionnaire II (System’s needs for technicians)
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE II (System’s needs for field technicians)
INTRODUCTION:
My name is NIYIGENA Gildas, student in 5th year Rural Development and Agri-Business at ISAE RUBILIZI; I am conducting a
research on the “Agriculture Development through Online Agro-Advisory (Web-based) System” on different sites (Case
studies) in Rwanda.
For better accomplishment of this study I will be grateful for your contribution, answering to a few questions below. Collected
information will be kept private and confidential for this research and subsequent system.
0. SHEET IDENTIFICATION I. INTERVIEWEE’S IDENTIFICATION
Date of visit: d d m m y y y y 1. Names:
Site District 2. Phone no.
Sector 3. Functions
II. AGRICULTURE AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY IN THE REGION III. PROGRAM AND POLICIES
4. Which agricultural (and animal husbandry) practices are done in this region?
9. Which programs and policies (national and local) have been adopted to raise agricultural productivity in this region?
5. How many people do live in this Sector? IV. INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES
6. How many do agricultural/animal breeding? 10. Do you get information on …? Yes No
7. How is the agricultural productivity in general?
a. Inputs availability
b. Cost of transport
c. Access to markets
d. Access to sponsor and mentors
e. Environmental protection
f. Diseases and pest occurrence
g. Seeds/Livestock improved varieties
11. How do people here access to information? Yes No
a. Telephones
b. Radios
8. Which obstacles do you meet for agricultural productivity in your Sector?
c. Television/Video
d. Newspapers
e. Meetings
f. Internet
V. INTERNET AND THE ONLINE EXTENSION USE
16. Do you have access to the internet? Yes No
17. How far is the nearest telecentre?
a. Less than 1km (exclusive)
b. Between 1km – 5km (exclusive)
c. Between 5km – 25km (exclusive)
d. Above 25km
e. No where
18. How often do you use internet?
19. What kind of information do you browse mostly?
[91]
Appendix VII: Interview with the institutions' experts
I. RESEACH PRESENTATION
a. Researcher
b. Research purpose
c. The reason for the visit
II. INSTITUTIONAL PRESENTAION AND SUGGESTIONS
a. About institution, purpose and specialties
b. Activities and Beneficiaries
c. Partners (Local and International)
d. Other relative initiatives in Rwanda
e. How they wish extension services to be improved in Rwanda
f. If they hope this new mode of extension is applicable in Rwanda (explain)
g. How they wish this system to work, and how they can collaborate with it
h. From their experience, what were the previous challenges
i. If there is anything they can add (Advice or ask us questions)
VI. INTERNET AND THE ONLINE EXTENSION USE (Continued) V. TRAININGS AND VISITS
20. Is there any information related to the agriculture, do you browse?
Yes No 22. Which trainings have you got concerning agriculture?
21. How do you get them?
a. By email
b. By search engine
c. By specific website (which ones?) 23. How did you access them?
a. From individual experts
b. Private institutions
c. Public institutions
d. Other
VI. INTERVIEWEE POINT OF VIEW 24. Is there any provided as a payable service? Yes No
29. After this the small introduction on web-extension, how do you wish may be?
a. It may focus on field extension agents b. It may focus directly to farmers 25. Is there any institution/individual from which
you wish get training, but not have access to it? Yes No
c. Cease to exist, we’ll only use traditional ones.
26. (If 25 is Yes) Who are they?
d. Cease, GoR/NGOs may train farmers on field
e. Other 27. (If 25 is Yes) why don’t you have access to them?
30. What advices may you give to improve this idea?
28. (If 25 is Yes) which training do you need from them?
THANK YOU FOR YOUR KIND ATTENTION!
[92]
Pro
vin
ce
Appendix VIII: Rwanda Administrative Stratification
District
Sector
a b c d e f G h i j k l m n o p q l s t u
1
Easte
rn P
rovin
ce
Bugesera
Mwogo
Ngeruka
Ntarama
Nyamata
Nyarugenge
Rilima
Ruhuha
Rweru
Shyara
1
Gatsibo
Bugarama
Gasange
Gitoki Kabarore
Kageyo
Kiramuruzi
Kiziguro
Muhura
Murambi
Ngarama
Nyamihanga
Remera
Rwimbogo
2
Kayonza
Gahini Kabare
Kabarondo
Mukarange
Murama
Murundi
Mwiri Ndego
Nyamirama
Rukara
Ruramira
Rwinkwavu
3
Kirehe
Gahara
Gatore
Kigarama
Kigina
Kirehe
Mahama
Mpanga
Musaza
Mushikiri
Nasho
Nyamugali
Nyarubuye
4
Ngoma
Gashanda
Jarama
Karembo
Kazo Kibungo
Mugesera
Murama
Mutenderi
Remera
Rukira
Rukumberi
Rurenge
Sake Zaza 5
Nyagatare
Gatunda
Karama
Karangazi
Katabagemu
Kiyombe
Matimba
Mimuli Mukama
Mushali
Nyagatare
Rukomo
Rwempasha
Rwimiyaga
Tabagwe
6
Rwamagana
Fumbwe
Gahengeri
Gishari
Karenge
Kigabiro
Muhazi
Munyaga
Munyiginya
Musha
Muyumbu
Mwulire
Nyakariro
Nzige
Rubona
7
2
Kig
ali
City
Gasabo
Bumbogo
Gatsata
Gikomero
Gisozi
Jabana
Jali Kacyiru
Kimihurura
Kimironko
Kinyinya
Ndera
Nduba
Remera
Rusororo
Rutunga
1
Kicukiro
Gahanga
Gatenga
Gikondo
Kagarama
Kanombe
Kicukiro
Kigarama
Masaka
Niboye
Nyarugunga
2
Nyarugenge
Gitega Kanyinya
Kigali Kimisagara
Mageragere
Muhima
Nyakabanda
Nyamirambo
Nyarugenge
Rwezamenyo
3
3
Nort
hern
Pro
vin
ce
Burera
Bungwe
Butaro
Cyanika
Cyeru Gahunga
Gatebe
Gitovu Kagogo
Kinoni
Kinyababa
Kivuye
Nemba
Rugarama
Rugengabari
Ruhunde
Rusarabuge
Rwerere
1
Gakenke
Busengo
Coko Cyabingo
Gakenke
Gashenyi
Janja
Kamubuga
Karambo
Kivuruga
Mataba
Minazi
Mugunga
Muhondo
Muyongwe
Muzo
Nemba
Ruli Rusasa
Rushashi
2
Gicumbi
Bukure Bwisige
Byumba
Cyumba
Giti Kageyo
Kaniga
Manyagiro
Miyove
Mukarange
Muko Mutete
Nyamiyaga
Nyankenke
Rubaya
Rukomo
Rushaki
Rutare
Ruvune
Rwamiko
Shangasha
3
Musanze
Busogo
Cyuve
Gacaca
Gashaki
Gataraga
Kimonyi
Kinigi Muhoza
Muko Musanze
Nkotsi
Nyange
Remera
Rwaza
Shingiro
4
Rulindo
Base Burega
Bushoki
Buyoga
Cyinzuzi
Cyungo
Kinihira
Kisaro
Masoro
Mbogo
Murambi
Ngoma
Ntarabana
Rukozo
Rusiga
Shyorongi
Tumba
5
[93]
4
South
ern
Pro
vin
ce
Gisagara
Gikonko
Gishubi
Kansi Kibilizi
Kigembe
Mamba
Muganza
Mugombwa
Mukindo
Musha
Ndora
Nyanza
Save 1
Huye Gishamvu
Huye Karama
Kigoma
Kinazi
Maraba
Mbazi Mukura
Ngoma
Ruhashya
Rusatira
Rwaniro
Simbi
Tumba
2
Kamonyi
Gacurabwenge
Karama
Kayenzi
Kayumbu
Mugina
Musambira
Ngamba
Nyamiyaga
Nyarubaka
Rugalika
Rukoma
Runda
3
Muhanga
Cyeza Kabacuzi
Kibangu
Kiyumba
Muhanga
Mushishiro
Nyabinoni
Nyamabuye
Nyarusange
Rongi Rugendabari
Shyogwe
4
Nyamagabe
Buruhukiro
Cyanika
Gasaka
Gatare
Kaduha
Kamegeri
Kibirizi Kibumbwe
Kitabi Mbazi Mugano
Musange
Musebeya
Mushubi
Nkomane
Tare Uwinkingi
5
Nyanza
Busasamana
Busoro
Cyabakamyi
Kibirizi
Kigoma
Mukingo
Muyira Ntyazo
Nyagisozi
Rwabicuma
6
Nyaruguru
Busanze
Cyahinda
Kibeho
Kivu Mata Muganza
Munini Ngera
Ngoma
Nyabimata
Nyagisozi
Ruheru
Ruramba
Rusenge
7
Ruhango
Bweramana
Byimana
Kabagari
Kinazi
Kinihira
Mbuye
Mwendo
Ntongwe
Ruhango
8
5
Weste
rn P
rovin
ce
Karongi
Bwishyura
Gishari
Gishyita
Gitesi Mubuga
Murambi
Murundi
Mutuntu
Rubengera
Rugabano
Ruganda
Rwankuba
Twumba
1
Ngororero
Bwira Gatumba
Hindiro
Kabaya
Kageyo
Kavumu
Matyazo
Muhanda
Muhororo
Ndaro
Ngororero
Nyange
Sovu
2
Nyabihu
Bigogwe
Jenda
Jomba
Kabatwa
Karago
Kintobo
Mukamira
Muringa
Rambura
Rugera
Rurembo
Shyira
3
Nyamasheke
Bushekeri
Bushenge
Cyazo
Gihombo
Kagano
Kanjongo
Karambi
Karengera
Kirimbi
Macuba
Mahembe
Nyabitekeri
Rangiro
Ruharambuga
Shangi
4
Rubavu
Bugeshi
Busasamana
Cyanzarwe
Gisenyi
Kanama
Kanzenze
Mudende
Nyakiliba
Nyamyumba
Nyundo
Rubavu
Rugerero
5
Rusizi Bugarama
Butare
Bweyeye
Gashonga
Giheke
Gihundwe
Gikundamvura
Gitambi
Kamembe
Muganza
Mururu
Nkanka
Nkombo
Nkungu
Nyakabuye
Nyakarenzo
Nzahaha
Rwimbogo
6
Rutsiro
Boneza
Gihango
Kigeyo
Kivumu
Manihira
Mukura
Murunda
Musasa
Mushonyi
Mushubati
Nyabirasi
Ruhango
Rusebeya
7
(by Gildas for Rwanda Online Agro-Advisory System)
Source: (NISR, 2013)
[94]
Appendix IX: Indices for sampling Plan
1a1 1b1 1c1 1d1 1e1 1f1 1g1 1h1 1i1
1a2 1b2 1c2 1d2 1e2 1f2 1g2 1h2 1i2 1j2 1k2 1l2 1m2
1a3 1b3 1c3 1d3 1e3 1f3 1g3 1h3 1i3 1j3 1k3 1l3
1a4 1b4 1c4 1d4 1e4 1f4 1g4 1h4 1i4 1j4 1k4 1l4
1a5 1b5 1c5 1d5 1e5 1f5 1g5 1h5 1i5 1j5 1k5 1l5 1m5 1n5
1a6 1b6 1c6 1d6 1e6 1f6 1g6 1h6 1i6 1j6 1k6 1l6 1m6 1n6
1a7 1b7 1c7 1d7 1e7 1f7 1g7 1h7 1i7 1j7 1k7 1l7 1m7 1n7
2a1 2b1 2c1 2d1 2e1 2f1 2g1 2h1 2i1 2j1 2k1 2l1 2m1 2n1 2o1
2a2 2b2 2c2 2d2 2e2 2f2 2g2 2h2 2i2 2j2
2a3 2b3 2c3 2d3 2e3 2f3 2g3 2h3 2i3 2j3
3a1 3b1 3c1 3d1 3e1 3f1 3g1 3h1 3i1 3j1 3k1 3l1 3m1 3n1 3o1 3p1 3q1
3a2 3b2 3c2 3d2 3e2 3f2 3g2 3h2 3i2 3j2 3k2 3l2 3m2 3n2 3o2 3p2 3q2 3r2 3s2
3a3 3b3 3c3 3d3 3e3 3f3 3g3 3h3 3i3 3j3 3k3 3l3 3m3 3n3 3o3 3p3 3q3 3r3 3s3 3t3 3u3
3a4 3b4 3c4 3d4 3e4 3f4 3g4 3h4 3i4 3j4 3k4 3l4 3m4 3n4 3o4
3a5 3b5 3c5 3d5 3e5 3f5 3g5 3h5 3i5 3j5 3k5 3l5 3m5 3n5 3o5 3p5 3q5
4a1 4b1 4c1 4d1 4e1 4f1 4g1 4h1 4i1 4j1 4k1 4l1 4m1
4a2 4b2 4c2 4d2 4e2 4f2 4g2 4h2 4i2 4j2 4k2 4l2 4m2 4n2
4a3 4b3 4c3 4d3 4e3 4f3 4g3 4h3 4i3 4j3 4k3 4l3
4a4 4b4 4c4 4d4 4e4 4f4 4g4 4h4 4i4 4j4 4k4 4l4
4a5 4b5 4c5 4d5 4e5 4f5 4g5 4h5 4i5 4j5 4k5 4l5 4m5 4n5 4o5 4p5 4q5
4a6 4b6 4c6 4d6 4e6 4f6 4g6 4h6 4i6 4j6
4a7 4b7 4c7 4d7 4e7 4f7 4g7 4h7 4i7 4j7 4k7 4l7 4m7 4n7
4a8 4b8 4c8 4d8 4e8 4f8 4g8 4h8 4i8
5a1 5b1 5c1 5d1 5e1 5f1 5g1 5h1 5i1 5j1 5k1 5l1 5m1
5a2 5b2 5c2 5d2 5e2 5f2 5g2 5h2 5i2 5j2 5k2 5l2 5m2
5a3 5b3 5c3 5d3 5e3 5f3 5g3 5h3 5i3 5j3 5k3 5l3
5a4 5b4 5c4 5d4 5e4 5f4 5g4 5h4 5i4 5j4 5k4 5l4 5m4 5n4 5o4
5a5 5b5 5c5 5d5 5e5 5f5 5g5 5h5 5i5 5j5 5k5 5l5
5a6 5b6 5c6 5d6 5e6 5f6 5g6 5h6 5i6 5j6 5k6 5l6 5m6 5n6 5o6 5p6 5q6 5r6
5a7 5b7 5c7 5d7 5e7 5f7 5g7 5h7 5i7 5j7 5k7 5l7 5m7
Legend/ Key: Code meaning:
Eastern Province 4g2 (First number) 4: This Sector belongs to Province no. 4 (Southern Province)
Kigali City (Last number) 2: Means this Sector belongs to District no. 2 among all
Districts of Province no 4 (Huye District) Northern Province
Southern Province (Letter in the middle) g: This Sector is the gth Sector on a list of
Sectors in District 2 of Province 4 (Mbazi Sector) Western Province
No Sector belongs to this box
(by Gildas for Rwanda Online Agro-Advisory System)