Determinants of cohesion in smallholder farmer groups in Uganda

David Agole; Edgar Yoder; Mark A.  Brennan; Connie Baggett; John Ewing; Matthew Beckman; Frank Biryabaho Matsiko

doi:10.37433/aad.v2i1.73

Authors

David Agole Kyambogo University, Uganda https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1297-983X
Edgar Yoder Pennsylvania State University, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6927-9252
Mark A. Brennan Pennsylvania State University, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8434-3948
Connie Baggett Pennsylvania State University, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5597-3094
John Ewing Pennsylvania State University, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9189-1106
Matthew Beckman Pennsylvania State University, USA https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6747-3289
Frank Biryabaho Matsiko Makerere University, Uganda https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7363-2584

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37433/aad.v2i1.73

Keywords:

NAADS, advisory services, community interaction

Abstract

Cohesion is a fundamental determinant of performance in farmer groups in which collective action is pursued for the benefit of the members. The study examined the influence of individual members’ objectives, participation culture, group rewards, structure of tasks and perceived equity on cohesion of farmer groups that can promote access to agricultural extension services. Quantitative data were collected from 180 members of 19 farmer groups using questionnaires selected in a multi-stage process that combined purposive and random sampling. Qualitative data were gathered from 20 key informants in oral interviews and three focus group discussions. Regression analysis indicated that there were statistically significant negative relationships between individual members’ objectives, structure of the tasks, group reward system and cohesion of farmer groups. In contrast, perceived equity had a statistically significant positive relationship with cohesion in farmer groups. We recommend that, for sustainability of group cohesion, group facilitators work with the farmer groups to ensure alignment of group and NAADS institutions and performance indicators. A group dynamics perspective to understanding farmer group cohesion should be a helpful organizing principle.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adong, A., Mwaura, F., & Okoboi, G. (2012). What determines membership to farmer groups in Uganda? Evidence from the Uganda Census of Agriculture 2008/9. Journal of Sustainable Development, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v6n4p37

Bukenya, C. (2010). Meeting farmer demand? An assessment of extension reform in Uganda. [Doctoral dissertation, Wageningen University]. Wageningen University and Research. https://library.wur.nl/WebQuery/wurpubs/fulltext/15663.

Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M. S. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279602

Dimock, H. G., & Devine, I. (1994). Making workgroups effective (3rd ed). Captus Press Inc.

Forsyth, D. R. (2006). Group dynamics (4th ed.). Thomson Wadsworth.

Greenwald, A. G., & Ronis, D. L. (1978). Twenty years of cognitive dissonance: Case study of evolution of a theory. Psychological Review, 85(1), 53–57. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.85.1.53

Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of leadership. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(3), 184–200. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_1

Lin, Z., Yang, H., Arya, B., Huang, Z., & Li, D. (2005). Structural versus individual perspectives on the dynamics of group performance: Theoretical exploration and empirical investigation. Journal of Management, 31(3), 354–380. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206304272150

Mangheni, M.N. (2007). Experiences, innovations and issues in agricultural extension in Uganda: Lessons and prospects. Fountain Publishers.

Ministry of Agriculture Animal Industry and Fisheries. (2010). Agriculture for food and income security: Development strategy and investment plan (DSIP), 2010/11-2014-15. MAAIF. http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/uga152492.pdf

Olomola, A. S. (2002). Social capital, microfinance group performance and poverty implications in Nigeria. Nigeria Institute of Social and Economic Resources (NISER). http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.567.6492&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Pigg, K. (1999). Community leadership and community theory: A practical synthesis. Community Development Society Journal, 30(2), 196–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575339909489721

Salifu, A., Francesconi, G. N., & Kolavalli, S. (2010). A review of collective action in rural Ghana (discussion paper 00998). International Food Policy Research Institute, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gian_Francesconi/publication/46442079_A_Review_of_Collective_Action_in_Rural_Ghana/links/55f933c508aeafc8ac202714/A-Review-of-Collective-Action-in-Rural-Ghana.pdf

Stolte, J. F., Fine, G. A., & Cook, K. S. (2001). Sociological miniaturism: Seeing the big through the small in social psychology. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 387¬¬¬-413. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.387

Turner, J. H., & Stets, J. E. (2006). Sociological theories of human emotions. Journal of Annual Sociology Review, 32, 25–52. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.32.061604.123130

Wilkinson, K. (1991). The community in rural America. Greenwood Press.

Zanna, M., & Cooper, J. (1974). Dissonance and the pill: An attribution approach to studying the arousal properties of dissonance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29(5), 703–709. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0036651