Diffusion of Innovations Model - Theoretical Framework Underpinning the Study

2.3 Theoretical Framework Underpinning the Study

2.3.1 Diffusion of Innovations Model

Rogers (2003:12) defined an innovation as any idea, object or practice that is perceived as new by members in a social system. Diffusion is the process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels, over time, among the members of a social system (Rogers 2003:5). Innovation in this study is perceived in the context of climate adaptation measures which have been introduced to farmers as a result of climate change and variability.

Using DOI, the study investigates how information generated through research is packaged

and disseminated to rural farmers to enable them to mitigate the negative impact of climate change and variability. Figure 2.1 shows components of Roger’s Diffusion of Innovations Model.

Figure 2.1: Components of Roger’s Diffusion of Innovations Model (Source: Rogers 1995:162)

Diffusion is a special type of communication concerned with the spread of messages that are perceived as new ideas. Rogers defines communication as a process in which participants create and share information with one another in order to reach a mutual understanding.

Diffusion has a special character, because of the newness of an idea in the content of the message. Thus some degree of uncertainty is involved in the diffusion process. Information is a difference in matter-energy that affects uncertainty in a situation where a choice exists among a set of alternatives.

The perception of an innovation by the members of a social system, determine its rate of adoption. The present study will investigate factors which contribute to adoption or non adoption of innovation by the forming of positive or negative attitudes to a particular innovation by farmers. The study will therefore explore how attributes of innovation influence attitudes to an innovation. Innovations disseminated to farmers need to be packaged in a simple and understandable way, as many farmers are illiterate. The information on climate change and variability generated through research and training must be disseminated in a user-friendly way, to be compatible with the methods and means of farming known to farmers. Since most farmers in rural areas are illiterate, the more complex the innovation is, the less likely it is expected to be utilised by farmers.

2.3.1.1 Communication Channels

A communication channel is the means by which information flows from one individual to another. Mass media channels are more effective in creating knowledge of innovations to a wider audience. These channels of communication enhance flow to, and the exchange of information among, users by facilitating the adoption process. For example, while the radio is very important at the awareness creation stage, the extension agent becomes a critical source of information during the adoption itself. In this regard, the DOI model has had a major influence on the way information is disseminated to end-users, such as farmers, and in creating awareness (Rogers 2003). Thus the media provide information and influence opinion and judgment. Interpersonal channels are more effective, however in disseminating information to a confined group of people who share similar social-cultural values. Thus, interpersonal channels play a major role in forming and changing attitudes to an innovation decision involving adoption by farmers. Most individuals evaluate an innovation, not on the basis of scientific research by experts, but through the subjective evaluations of near-peers

who have adopted the innovation. These near-peers serve as role models, whose innovation behaviour tends to be imitated by others in their system (Rogers 2003).

2.3.1.2 People Involved in Innovation

DOI describes a change agent as an individual who attempts to influence clients’ innovation- decisions in a direction that is deemed desirable by a change agency. In this regard, the nature of networks and the roles opinion leaders play determine the likelihood that the innovation will be adopted. Opinion leadership has been described as the degree to which an individual is able to influence other individuals’ attitudes or overt behaviour informally, in a desired way, with relative frequency (Rogers 2003:27). Opinion leaders exert influence on audience behaviour via their personal contacts, but additional intermediaries called change agents and gatekeepers are also included in the process of diffusion. In this study, government leaders at village level and influential people in the village are referred to as opinion leaders. Their role is to sensitise farmers on innovations which aim to improve their livelihoods. Information is disseminated and channelled through various means such as agricultural extension officers, person-to-person, community radio, research findings dissemination workshops, government agencies, politicians, government leaders, television, fliers and brochures. Indeed, without these channels, the farmer cannot have access to new agricultural innovations practices such as research on new varieties of seeds which are drought and disease tolerant, new farming practices, small-scale irrigation, water conservation mechanisms such as harvesting, change and use of technology in farming, diversification on agriculture and food conservation techniques.

2.3.1.3 Supporting Mechanisms

The new agricultural knowledge acquired by the farmers will either be adapted to suit their environment or neglected (non-adaptation). To adapt, farmers will need supporting mechanisms or an environment which enhances the knowledge transformation to impact agricultural production. These include timely access to information, a well-framed institutional framework for information transfer, proper infrastructure, confidence as a result of practice and the availability of financial services. On the other hand, the failure to adapt can be caused by the lack of timely access to information sources, education (formal or informal), attitude, poverty, economy, inadequate knowledge, poor infrastructure such as roads and dwellings, and ignorance. In the present study, the channels of information and communications will be analysed to reveal an understanding of information packaging and

dissemination. More details on the description of these variables are furnished in Chapter Three of this study.

2.3.1.4 Attributes of Innovations

DOI also outlines the attributes influencing diffusion of innovations and adoption of users in a particular system. These, as stated earlier, include complexity, relative advantage, trialability, observability and compatibility. Relative advantage is defined as the degree to which an innovation is perceived as being better than the idea it presents (Rogers 2003: 229).

Relative advantage is largely expressed in terms of economic and social benefits. Conversely, compatibility is the degree to which an innovation is perceived as consistent with the existing values, past experiences and needs of the potential adopter (Rogers 2003:240). Rogers further explains that an idea that is more compatible to users is less uncertain to the potential adopter and conforms to the individual’s situation. Rogers (2003: 257) describes complexity as the extent to which an innovation is perceived as relatively difficult to understand and use.

Rogers stresses that complexity is of critical importance when new ideas are introduced into a social system. This lies in the fact that any new idea introduced to people may be clear or not clear in meaning and thus classified on the complexity/simplicity range.

Trialability, according to Rogers (2003:266), is the level to which an innovation may be experimented with, on a limited basis. Rogers postulates that the complexity of an innovation, as perceived by members of a social system, is positively related to its rate of adoption.

Additionally, observability is defined as the degree to which the results of an innovation are visible to others (Rogers 2003:266). Rogers hypothesised a positive relationship between observability of an innovation, as perceived by members of a social system, with the rate of adoption. A more detailed description of the perceived characteristics of an innovation is given in Chapter Three.

2.3.1.5 Heterophily

The DOI model describes heterophily as the degree to which two or more individuals who interact are different in certain attributes, such as beliefs, education and social status (Rogers 2003:19). The present study will seek to investigate the level of heterophily of the information disseminators (researchers and extension officers) and receivers (farmers) (See the research question in Section 1.6.2 in Chapter One, which addresses factors affecting access and use of information on adaptation to climate change and variability by farmers).

Most human communication takes place between individuals who are homophilous, a situation that leads to more effective communication. Therefore the heterophily that is often present in the diffusion of innovations leads to special problems in securing effective communication. Societal norms and attitudes of farmers towards innovation and confirmation or rejection of an innovation also play a crucial role in adaptation to climate change and variability. Hence, heterophily was used in this study to see if the differences between information disseminators (researchers, extension officers) and information users (farmers) affect the access and use of disseminated information on adaptation to climate change and variability from source to users (see questions j76 and j78 in appendices 1 and 2, respectively).

2.3.1.6 Time

Time is involved in diffusion in the innovation-decision process, the innovativeness of an individual or other unit of adoption and an innovation’s rate of adoption in a system, usually measured as the number of members of the system who adopt the innovation in a given period of time. The innovation-decision process is the process through which an individual (or other decision-making unit) passes from first knowledge of an innovation to forming an attitude toward the innovation, to a decision to adopt or reject, to implementation of the new idea, and to confirmation of this decision (Rogers 2003:20).

2.3.1.7 Stages of the Innovation Process

In the innovation-decision process, five steps are involved. These are: (1) knowledge; (2) persuasion; (3) decision; (4) implementation; and (5) confirmation. Knowledge is gained when an individual learns of the innovation’s existence and gains some understanding of how it functions. Persuasion takes place when an individual forms a positive or negative attitude towards the innovation. A decision occurs when an individual engages in activities that lead to a choice to adopt or reject the innovation.

The implementation stage takes place when an individual puts an innovation into use. Re- invention is said to occur during the implementation stage. Confirmation is the last stage in the decision process, and occurs when an individual seeks reinforcement of an innovation- decision that has already been made, but he or she may reverse this previous decision if exposed to conflicting messages about the innovation. Societal norms and attitudes of farmers

towards innovation and its relation to confirmation or rejection of an innovation play a crucial role in adaptation to climate change and variability.

Rogers (2003:20-21) points out that the innovation-decision process is an information seeking and information-processing activity in which an individual seeks information at various stages in the innovation-decision process in order to decrease uncertainty about an innovation’s expected consequences. The innovation-decision process involves knowledge acquisition of an innovation to enhance shaping ones attitude toward adopting an innovation.

Rogers’s DOI distinguishes three main types of innovation-decisions. These are optional innovation-decisions, which comprise choices made by an individual independent of the decisions of the other members of the system to adopt or reject the innovation. The second type of innovation-decision is collective innovation-decisions, where choices are made by consensus among the members of a system and the third is the authority innovation-decisions, whereby choices to adopt or reject an innovation are made by relatively few individuals in a system possessing power, status, or technical expertise. Rogers (2003:30) points out a fourth category, which consists of a sequential combination of two or more of these types of innovation-decisions, termed contingent innovation-decisions which are choices to adopt or reject that are made only after a prior innovation-decision. A social system thus influences diffusion and adoption of an innovation through shaping an individual’s knowledge and hence determines adoption or rejection of an innovation.

2.3.1.8 Social System

DOI delineates a social system as a set of interrelated units that are engaged in joint problem- solving to accomplish a common goal (Rogers 2003:23). A system has a structure defined as the patterned arrangements of the units in a system, which gives stability and regularity to individual behaviour in a system. The social and communication structure of a system facilitates or impedes the diffusion of innovations in the system. Norms are the established behaviour patterns for the members of a social system and serve as a guide or standard for the behaviour of members of a social system (Rogers 2003:26).

2.3.1.9 Members of a Social System

Innovativeness is the degree to which an individual or other unit of adoption is relatively earlier in adopting new ideas than other members of a social system (Rogers 2003:22).

Classifications of the members of a social system on the basis of their innovativeness include

five adopter categories. These are innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority and laggards. Innovators are those people who are first individuals to respond by adopting an innovation. They apply the information disseminated to them by taking a risk and being ready to try an innovation so as to enjoy the benefits (Rogers 1995). Early adopters are those individuals in a society who take some time to learn from innovators on an innovation before making a decision to adopt an innovation. Early adopters make a decision to implement and confirm an innovation when they have seen the benefits to the innovators (Rogers 1995). The early majority is the third category of individuals who take more time than innovators and early adopters to utilise an innovation (Rogers 1995). This category usually looks at the innovators’ and early adopters’ achievements before adapting to an innovation.

The late majority forms the fourth category of members of a social system. The late majority is a category of individuals who take a much longer period of time to observe how the other subsequent categories have implemented their innovations, before embarking on an innovation. The late majority category is said to describe those who are doubtful and fear to implement an innovation, as they foresee uncertainty (Rogers 1995). Laggards are the last category of members in a society to adopt an innovation. Laggards are believed to be traditional. They dislike changes and are less motivated by an innovation (Rogers 1995).

Rogers (2003) describes the rate of adoption as the relative speed with which an innovation is adopted by members of a social system. The rate of adoption is said to be contributed by a number of factors such as access to information, level of education, knowledge, finance and local institutions. A detailed description on factors, influencing adoption is explained in Chapter Three, the literature review.

In spite of the amount of research being done, and the awareness created in Tanzania to address the problem of agricultural production in relation to adaptation to climate change and variability in rural areas, little has been done to determine the impact of these efforts on rural farmers. The DOI model presents communication channels, social systems variables and perceived characteristics of innovation as independent variables. The independent variables influence the knowledge acquisition and persuasion of adaptation, which then determine whether the farmers will adopt or reject the new innovation. Once the information received is perceived as of advantage to farmers, they may adopt and continue using it, or discontinue using it at a later stage. They may decide to reject the acquired new knowledge and later on adopt it or constantly continue rejecting the new knowledge on adaptation to climate change

and variability. Hence, this study, among other issues, attempts to ascertain farmers’

knowledge on climate change and variability.

It is hence anticipated that when farmers have access to information and adapt to new agricultural practices, there is a higher chance that food productivity will increase at the level of households and nationally will enhance food security. However, the fight against food insecurity cannot be achieved without reflecting on climate change and variability as a serious threat to agricultural production. The above explanations show a mutual relationship between agricultural crop production and climate change and variability. For farmers to cope, adapt and mitigate the adverse impacts of climate change and variability, they need to have adaptation information and knowledge in agricultural production. Lack of timely access to information impedes farmers’ ability to make decision such as what to plant, where to plant, in which season and how to ensure food is preserved. It also affects farmers utilising opportunities arising due to climate variability, access to markets, coping knowledge to engage in other economic activities and so on. Based on the arguments above, it is the National Adaptation Programme of Action (NAPA) which aspires to imparting knowledge on best practices concerning adapting to climate change and variability to citizens in the country.

Farmers will fail to adopt and practise new knowledge if the information disseminated does not reach the targeted farmers on time. Therefore this study intends to investigate how the information on adaptation to climate change and variability is packaged and disseminated to farmers within the agricultural sector in Tanzania.

Dalam dokumen Information dissemination for adaptation to climate change and variability in the agriculture sector : the case of Malunga and Chibelela villages, central Tanzania. (Halaman 52-60)