الفهرس 
الباب الثانىيوجد فقط 14 صفحة متاحة للعرض العام
 |  | from | 162 |  |  |
| | | from | 162 | | |
المستخلص
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ADOPTION OF THE FARMERS TO AGRICULTURE SUGAR- BEET CROP IN EL- MENIA AND KAFR EL- SHEIKH GOVERNORATES
ABU EL-AZIZ HARIDI AHMED IIARIDI 2004
SUMMARY
Sugar beet crop was introduced first time in Egypt at eighth in Karr El-Sheikh Governorate. Menia Governorate was the latest area for sugar beet production. Thus, are the levels and degrees of adoption for sugar beet package are equal between both of Kafr El-Sheikh and Menia? Are the levels and degrees of adoption for each recommendation between farmers of the ”biggest” district in cultivated area with sugar beet and the ”smaller” district in each of the two intended. Governorates. Therefore, what variables are correlates with the total score of adoption among the farmers in each district (high — lower cultivated area) with sugar beet in both Kafr El-Sheikh and
Menia Governorates.
Objectives:
The study seeks to achieved the following objectives.:
First:
Determining the difference between the adoption scores of each of recommendation in sugar-beet package and the total score farmers of Sidy Salem (the high cultivated area) and Fewa (the low cultivated area) in Kafr El-Sheikh Governorate.
S11131.11?}.
Second:
Determining the difference between the adoption scores of each of recommendation in sugar beet package and the total Score also among the farmers of Malawy (the high cultivated
area) and Dair Mawas (the low cultivated area) in Menia Governorate.
Third:
Determining the differences between the four studied
di.Oricts and the total scores of adoption package of sugar beet production.
Fourth:
Determining the relationship between the total score adoption of sugar beet package as the dependant variables and each of the following independents: age, educational degree, farm size, degree of owned farm agricultural machinery, frequency of visiting agricultural services centers, size of holding farm animals under two years, degree of holding form animals two years and above, variation of agricultural farming activities, size of cultivated area with sugar beet in the old land, size of cultivated area with sugar beet in the new land, total cultivated area with sugar-beet, production average with the crop last year, degree of information sources about sugar-beet and price per ton of sugar-beet crop last year. This is for each respondents in Sidy Salem, Fewa, Malawy and Dair Mawas.
SUMMARY
Research procedures:
To conduct this study two governorates were. choused; Kafr El-Sheikh the first place planted sugar beet in Egypt and Menia the last one.
In each governorates the research was selected the highest district in cultivated area and the lowest district. Thus there were Sidy Salem and Fewa in Kafr EI-Sheikh Governorate, and Malawy and Dair Mawas in Menia Governorate.
This research population was the total of sugar-beet growers in the two districts of each governorates. It reached 15109 farmers in Sidy Salem and Fewa. And reached 1351 farmers at Malawy and Dair Mawas in Menia Governorate. According to-Cochran Equation for sample size, the sample size in Kafr EI-Sheikh were 390 distributed and selected randomly to 382 from Sidy Salem and 8 respondents in Fewa.
The sample size according to that equation in Menia reached 308 respondents were selected and distributed randomly to 272. and 36 farmers for Malawy and dair Mawas in order. All respondents were implemented cultivation sugar-beet as innovation for two years at least before and continue this growing upnow.
Data were collected through a designed questionnaire with interviews, it was contained the questions and scales which provide data needed to test hypothesis delete with thi dependant variable and the independents.
SUMMARY -3-
Test of ”t”, simple correlation coefficient and ANOVA were the statistical tools for analyzing data on the personal computer.
Mean, standerdeviation, frequencies and percentages were the main descriptive tools. Main results: First:
There is a significant difference of the average of adoption between the respondents of Sidy Salem and Fewa for each of the following recommendations at 0.01 level:
Crop rotation. Land ploughing. Planting date. Furrowing.
Quantity seed. Planting spacing. Depth of pits.
Date of transplanting.
Thinning date.
No. of cultivations.
Date of second cultivation.
Date of third cultivation.
Quantity of nitrogen fertilization.
Method of nitrogen fertilization.
Date of second nitrogen fertilization.
SUMMARY -4-
Quantity of phosphoric fertilization. Date of phosphoric fertilization. Quantity of potassium fertilization. Date of potassium fertilization.
No. of irrigations.
Planting irrigations
Planting irrigation (How).
Time of stooping irrigation.
Harvesting date.
Method of harvesting.
Transporting of the crop.
Controlling pests and diseases, and The total score of Adoption. Second: S
There is a significant difference of the average of adoption between the respondents of Sidy Salem and Fewa for each of the following recommendation at 0.05 sign level:
- Weed control. Third:
There is no significant difference of the average of adoption between the previous two groups, dealing with the rest of recommendations.
SUMMAR Y -5-
Fourth:
There is a significant difference of the average of adoption between Malawy and Dair Mawas respondents for each of the following recommendations at 0.01 level:
Land ploughing.
Date of planting.
-Furrowing.
-Planting spaces.
Pits depth.
Date of transplanting.
Thinning date.
Weed control.
Cultivation.
Date of second cultivation. Date of third cultivation.
Quantity of nitrogen fertilization. Method of nitrogen fertilization. Date of nitrogen fertilization.
Date of second nitrogen fertilization. Potassium fertilization quantity. Dates of potassium fertilization.
No. of irrigations.
Methods of irrigations.
Rational use of irrigations.
Irrigation in lime soils.
SUMMARY -6-
Harvesting date.
Method of harvesting.
Using plough in harvesting. •
Transplanting the crop.
Controlling pests and diseases.
Total score of adoption. Fifth:
There is a significant difference of the average of adoption between Malawi and Dair Mawas respondents at the level of 0.05 for date of potassium fertilization. Sixth:
There is no significant difference of the adoption average between Malawy and Dair Mawas respondents for the rest of recommendations. Seventh:
Dealing with the analysis of variance and (f) ratio:
There were significant differences between the four districts and all the adoption scores of the recommendations of sugar beet package, except suitable soil for the old lands and irrigation in the lime soils.
SUMMARY -7-
Eighth:
According to the results of L.S.D. test the four districts were ranked as follows: Sidy Salem, Malawy, Dair Mawas and in the lowest Fewa. Ninth:
Dealing with the determining the relationships: I = For Sidy Salem:
A-There is a positive significant correlationship at 0.01 level between the total score of adoption and each of the following variables:
Dgree of owned farm machinery.
Frequent visits to the agricultural service centers. Size of farm animals less than 2 years.
Size of farm animals 2 years and above.
Dgree of information sources about sugar beet.
B-There is a positive significant correlation ship at 0.05 level between the total score of adoption and each of the fbllowing variables:
Size of holding farm.
Size of cultivated area with sugar beet.
C-There is no significant correlation coefficient dealing with the rest of the variables.
SUMITIARY
2 = For Fewa:
There is no significant correlation coefficient between the total score of adoption and each of the independent variables.
3 = For Malawy:
A-There is a negative significant correlation coefficient between the total score of adoption• at 0.01 level with the following variables:
Educational degree.
No. of holed fram machinery
Size of farm animals 2 years and above. Price of sugar-beet crop per ton last year.
B-There is a negative significant correlation coefficient at 0.05 level between the total score of adoption and each of the following variables:
Size of farm animals less than 2 years. Total cultivated area with sugar-beet.
C-There is no significant correlation dealing with the rest of variables
4 = For Dair Mawas:
There is no significant correlation coefficient between the total score of adoption and each of the studied variables.
So the relative weight of each independent variable had been varied among the four districts. It means that there are no
SUAMMRY -9-
patterns of influence of the studied variables on the adoption. Further studies needs to consider the social and cultural variables
to prove that the adoption has a cultural and societal dimension besides the individual dimension.