ABSTRACT

The overall purpose of the study was to assess the performance of' the operations of  fled Agricultural extension Service in enugu State. Specifically the objectives were to assess the organizational structure for implement UAES in enugu State, assess 11 ie extension personnel related Factors affecting operations ol lIAl'S activities in [nugu Stale, evaluate the type and number of technologies piomoted by extension and adonted by firmers From 1991 - 2004, determine the factors aFFecting the adoption ot technologies b\' farmers, identily the Factors af'Fecting the dissemination ol technolocical packages in the state, determine the level of Funding of' UAI S in the state f'roni I 90 1 2004. and exam inc t'easiis 'or slow or inc Fftctive implementation of LIAl S from the perspective of' both extension workers and Farmers. A mull istage sampling technique was employed in the select ion of zones, blocks, circles, sub-circles, while random sampling was used in (lie selection oF kiriners and extension personnel. Ninety-six (96) contact Farm Fani i lies and 93 extension pei'sonnel, making a total of' I 5o) constituted the respondents for this study. l)ata collected were subjected to descriptive and in Fei'ential analysis (i.e. Frequency, percentage. mean, ('hi-square. 'I-test and Factor analysis). 'Ihe findings showed that th organizational structure Far implementing I JAI S was put in place in the ADP and was in accordance with the pi'o f'essional extension system. 'l'hc result of' the study i'c 'ealed that role oF extension staFF, profitable extension sla it' activities, and e f'f'ec five sta if' operations, and correct application of' technologies induced the operations of' the UA I S in Lnugu State. '1 lie result unveiled that 97 technologies in (lie various components of' crops, livestock, agro-l'orestry, fishery, and WIA were pronioted, 33% oF the firmers adopted the technology wlulc 67% did not adopt. Reasons Far adopt ion were: technologies not di f'Ficul I to understand. easy to lay hands on, cheap to obtain. inei'ease in Farm output, increase in income, improved skill in Farming, hetlei' utilization of Farm produce. increase in (lie standai'd of living of' the homer, technologies being compatible with the larni ing system, corn patibi I ity with the peoples soc io-cultui'al values, reduced labour cost, and reduced drudgery. Main reasons f'or non-adoption of' pronioted technologies include: se arcity of' cultivable land. scarcity of' inputs mid lack of Funds liv the target clientele, factors aFfecting adoption inch ode: unsustainable technology, lack of government incentives and scarcity of' inputs and socio-econom ic inhibition and complexity of technology. The findings indicated that Faulty technology and use pattern, complementary Faci lilies to technology adoption and dearth oF appi'opriatc technology, wei'e iacl.ors afFecting technology dissemination in the UAFS. i'he result 01 the hypothesis tested Far a di fThrence, that there is no relationship between institutional Factors and dissemination of technologies in (lie state using Chi-square analytical tool was statistically significant at 5 percent level indicating that institutional Factors af'fcct dissemination oF technology in the systeni. I loweve, the result of the hypothesis tested Far a di f'ference in budgeted and actual f'unds released f'rom 1 991 - 2004 using T-test showed that there was no significant. (Ii f'ference between budgeted and actual Funds released For (lie study. Constraint areas in the implementation of I Al 5 as viewed by extension personnel include: LIALS is theory-based and no resem'ch e f'f'ork pour iliatiagernent of' UAFS and ineFfective extension practice. 'I'lìe constraint ai'eas in I JALS uplementation wei'e also viewed by the Farmet's to inch ode: i isensitivity of' government agency to the needs, interests and problems of' Farmers. con nucation and technology (Ii f'ticulties. inadequacy of' Funds and extension staff. Policy si iggesi ions are made as Fol lows: momte ring (lie operations oF the I JAbS should not lie an internal Ffiur. should co-opt cx tenia I agencies. '[here should be adequate staf'f' and commitmen of' persus and resources to extension, and comm itineni to (lie basic lrinci pies that underlie t is management in order to make the extension service more cf'feclive. T'echiiiology should be niedi fled to suit the socio-cultural context of' the people. if' tJz\ES should :.iiv survive, lariTierS Should have access to the services ol ancillary oriani .aUons such as credit to procure inputs. Research-I xtcnsion linkage should be rein lbrced to involve the farmers adequately in technology cicvelopnient A comniilnient to extension at the political level should convince the leadership about the bene Its ( I' extension, so as to allocate funds. Iliere should he a co-operative efforts by the three tiers of government ( local. ta1e and lederal ) in funding hA lS . Counterpart funds shoutd be released on lime fr pograinlue liii He ieiitatioii..r itical variables that lead to Collect adoptiou and use ol innovation such as input delivery, rural inlrast.ructurc, land availability. ellccl.ivc extension, and rural credit delivery system are imperative, technologies should be resource conserving and environmentally friendly, suct aable and do not exploit the target audience.