Over-all socio-economic level of the adopters and the non-adopters
From the Table 1 it is revealed that the majority of the adopters accounted for 47.42 per cent are having high socio-economic level, followed by 40.33 per cent of medium level and 12.25 per cent that of low level. The non-adopters in contrarily depicted that 49.04 per cent are of medium level, followed by 30.00 that of low level and 20.96 per cent who are in the high level socio-economic level. It has been found that there was a difference in the socio-economic level of the adopters as compare to the non-adopters. The adopters were found to have higher socio-economic status mainly because of their higher income due to the extra income from inter-crops. The findings were also corroborated those of
Jaganathan and Nagaraja (2015) and
Kumaran et al., (2018).
Attitude of the adopters and non-adopters towards inter-cropping
Attitude of the adopters towards inter-cropping
The results of the Table 2 on “Attitude of the adopters towards inter-cropping” depicted that majority of the adopters accounted for 96.77 per cent agreed that inter-cropping decrease the production cost by reducing the input purchases,85.48 per cent disagreed that inter-cropping is very difficult to practice, 64.51 per cent disagreed that inter-cropping is only troublesome because it need extra attention. 90.32 per cent agreed that inter-cropping gives additional yield income/unit area than sole cropping, 90.32 per cent agreed that inter-cropping is a better source of soil utilization, regarding the statement on management of intercrops whether its having different cultural practices seems to be difficult task the results shows that majority of the adopters accounted for 80.64 per cent disagreed, 93.54 per cent were undecided that higher amount of fertilizer or irrigation water cannot be utilized properly as the component crops vary in their response of these resources, 93.22 per cent were undecided that inter-cropping reduces soil runoff and controls weeds. In the statement whether inter-cropping acts as an insurance against failure of crops in abnormal year the majority of the adopters accounted for 96.77 per cent agreed and 79.04 per cent were undecided that whether harvesting is difficult. Similar findings can also be seen in the findings of
Magarvadiya and Patel (2014) and
Kalita et al., (2017).
Attitude of the non- adopters towards intercropping
The results of the Table 3 on “Attitude of the adopters towards inter-cropping” depicted that majority of the non-adopters accounted for 93.55 per cent were undecided whether inter-cropping decrease the production cost by reducing the input purchases; in the statement of Inter-cropping is very difficult to practice it has been found that 93.22 per cent were undecided, 90.33 per cent were undecided about the statement whether inter-cropping is only troublesome because it need extra attention, In the statement whether inter-cropping gives additional yield income/unit area than sole cropping it has been found that majority of the non-adopters accounted for 95.16 per cent were undecided. In the statement whether inter-cropping is a better source of soil utilization it has been found that majority of the non-adopters accounted for 95.16 per cent were undecided. In the statement of whether management of intercrops having different cultural practices seems to be difficult task it has been found that majority of the non-adopters accounted for 67.76 per cent agreed. In the statement whether higher amount of fertilizer or irrigation water cannot be utilized properly as the component crops vary in their response of these resources it has been found out that majority of the non-adopters accounted for 96.78 per cent were undecided. In the statement whether Inter-cropping reduce soil runoff and controls weeds it has been found out that Majority of the non-adopters accounted for 96.78 per cent were undecided. In the statement whether inter-cropping acts as an insurance against failure of crops in abnormal year it has been found out that majority of the adopters accounted for 83.88 per cent were undecided. In the statement of whether harvesting is difficult it has been found out that majority of the adopters accounted for 68.38 per cent were undecided, 29.04 per cent agreed and only 2.58 disagreed. Similar findings is also observed with the findings of
Nouman et al., (2008).
Over-all attitude level of the adopters and non-adopters
From the Fig 1 over-all attitude level of the adopters and non-adopters depicted that 82.25 per cent of the adopters are having the most favourable attitude towards inter-cropping, 14.52 per cent were having favourable attitude and 3.23 were having unfavourable attitude. Contrarily, greater numbers of the non-adopters accounted for 54.84 per cent are having are having favourable attitude, 43.45 per cent are having unfavourable attitude and only 1.61 per cent are having most favourable attitude level.
It can be discerning that majority of the adopter are having the most favourable and positive attitude towards inter-cropping practices and the non-adopter are having a favourable towards inter-cropping practices. The most favourable were found to have been developed in a mass of the adopters because they are progressive farmers whose income exceeds 1 lakh per annum and they have a capacious land area with cost effective income. And even though the attitude towards inter-cropping is favourably by the non-adopters they are unable to start the inter-cropping practices due to the unavailability of land and deficit finance. The unfavourable attitude of the adopters was only because of the unavailability of regular market that makes them difficult to sell the produce and the scarcity of labour during the processing time of black pepper and the attack of pest and disease on betel vine leaves that makes its value deteriorate while marketing.
The attitude of the adopters was most favourable as compare to the non-adopters towards the inter-cropping practices. There is a need to persuade the non-adopters to adopt the inter-cropping practices even though they have many constraints as to why they did not practice the inter-cropping practices by showing them the benefits of inter-cropping through awareness programs, mass media and other approaches.
Similar findings is also seen from the findings of
Ogunsumi and Omobolanle (2011).
Significant relationship between the selected independent variables and level of attitude of the adopters and non-adopters
Table 4 depicted that there was no significant relationship between gender, age, educational status, type of house, family size, family type and social category of the adopters with their attitude level but there was a significant relationship between marital status, occupation, size of land holding and annual income of the adopters. However, there was no significant relationship between gender, type of house and social category of the non-adopters and their level of attitude but there was a significant relationship between age, marital status, educational status, family size, family type, occupation, size of land holding and annual income of the non-adopters. The significant relationship indicated that the variables are having an effect towards the increase and decrease of the attitude of the respondents whereas the non-significant relationship signified that the above mentioned variables does not have an effect on the changes of attitude among the respondents.
