Perception of the respondents towards activities of Arya based programme in the Kaushambi district of Uttar Pradesh

Introduction

Agriculture and allied sector are the heart of social development of our country. It has significant importance because it provides livelihood for majority of our population and is highly contributing to national income and for gainful employment. Livestock sector is an important subsector of the agriculture of Indian economy. It forms an important livelihood activity for most of the farmers in the form of critical inputs, contributing to the health and nutrition of the household, supplementing income hand offering employment opportunity. Rural areas are the economic backbone of most developing countries and contribute to their overall economic growth through creation of jobs and supply of food and raw materials to other growing sectors of the economy. Not with standing, rural areas are the most marginalized and characterized by poverty. Hence poverty remains predominantly a rural phenomenon despite rapid urbanization observed in most developing and transition countries (IFAD, 2001). Realizing the prominent role of rural youth in agricultural development especially from the point of view of food security of the country, ICAR has initiated a scheme on "Attracting and Retaining of Youth in Agriculture (ARYA)". This project was launched by the Prime Minister on the Foundation day of ICAR in 2015 and initially implemented through Krishi Vigyan Kendra' sin 25 states of the country.

Research Methodology

Ex-post facto research design was followed for the present study as the events have alreadyoccurred and design will have considered appropriate. The study is carried out in the Kaushambi district of Uttar Pradesh. Out of 8 blocks, one block namely Mooratganj was selected purposively based on maximum area under ARYA based beneficiaries. From the selected bock, 8 villages were selected purposively based on maximum area under ARYA based beneficiaries making the sample of 160 respondents. From table 1, the comparative analysis of beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries under the ARYA programme revealed significant socio-economic and psychological differences between the two groups. In terms of age, a higher proportion of non-beneficiaries (45%) belonged to the older age group compared to beneficiaries (40%), while beneficiaries had a greater representation in the middle age group (40%). Educationally, non-beneficiaries showed a higher percentage of illiteracy (43.75%) than beneficiaries (35%).

Results and Discussion

Regarding family type, nuclear families were more common among non-beneficiaries (68.75%) than beneficiaries (56.25%). A larger percentage of beneficiaries (67.50%) lived in semi-cemented houses, whereas non-beneficiaries (50%) predominantly resided in cemented houses. In terms of landholding, both groups were primarily marginal farmers, but a greater proportion of non-beneficiaries (78.75%) held less than one hectare of land compared to beneficiaries (63.75%). Beneficiaries reported higher annual incomes, with 55% earning between ₹50,001-₹1,00,000, while 61.25% of non-beneficiaries earned up to ₹50,000. Mass media contact and psychological traits such as risk-taking ability, achievement motivation, and progressiveness were www.extensionjournal.com generally higher among beneficiaries, indicating a more proactive and progressive outlook. These findings suggested that beneficiaries were relatively better positioned in terms of economic engagement and behavioral disposition, likely due to their involvement in ARYA-based interventions. Similar findings are also reported by (Singh, R.K. and Sharma, P.K.). From the 3, it can be insights into the perception levels of beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries regarding the subject under study. Among the beneficiaries, a significant majority (61.25%) possess a high level of perception, followed by 27.50 per cent with medium perception and only 11.25 per cent with low perception. This suggests that beneficiaries generally have a clearer understanding or more favorable attitude towards the program or innovation. On the other hand, non-beneficiaries show a contrasting pattern, with the highest proportion (35.00%) having low perception, 25.00 per cent in the medium category, and only 40.00 per cent exhibiting high perception. This disparity highlights a potential link between perception and program participation, indicating that individuals with higher perception levels are more likely to benefit from or engage with initiatives. The data underscores the importance of awareness and perception-building measures as strategic tools to increase participation rates and effectiveness of developmental programs among rural or target communities. Similar findings are also reported by (Singh, R., & Sharma, P. (2023) [5] . From table 4, the correlation coefficients between selected independent variables and participation status among beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries. For beneficiaries, variables such as land holding (r=0.990*), education (r=0.947*), and occupation (r=0.882*) show very strong and highly significant positive correlations, indicating their critical role in influencing participation. Similarly, risktaking ability (r=0.777*) and age (r=0.749*) also show strong correlations. For non-beneficiaries, mass media contact (r=0.874*) and occupation (r=0.619*) demonstrate strong and significant relationships, suggesting that exposure to information and employment type are key www.extensionjournal.com factors affecting engagement. While variables like type of house and progressiveness are significantly associated with participation in both groups, their correlation is stronger among non-beneficiaries. Notably, the significance of most variables in both groups highlights that socio-economic and psychological factors collectively impact individuals' likelihood to participate in developmental programs. These findings underline the need for targeted interventions considering these key variables to enhance program reach and effectiveness. Similar findings are also reported by.

Conclusion

It was concluded that majority of the respondents were living in medium level of socio economic status. In terms of age, a higher proportion of non-beneficiaries (45%) belonged to the older age group compared to beneficiaries (40%), while beneficiaries had a greater representation in the middle age group (40%). Educationally, nonbeneficiaries showed a higher percentage of illiteracy (43.75%) than beneficiaries (35%). Regarding family type, nuclear families were more common among nonbeneficiaries (68.75%) than beneficiaries (56.25%). Beneficiaries reported higher annual incomes, with 55% earning between ₹50,001-₹1,00,000, while 61.25% of nonbeneficiaries earned up to ₹50,000. Among the beneficiaries, a significant majority (61.25%) possess a high level of perception, followed by 27.50 per cent with medium perception and only 11.25 per cent with low perception. Correlation analysis for beneficiaries, variables such as land holding (r=0.990*), education (r=0.947*), and occupation (r=0.882*) show very strong and highly significant positive correlations, indicating their critical role in influencing participation. Similarly, risk-taking ability (r=0.777*) and age (r=0.749*) also show strong correlations. Suggestion of respondents (93.75%) suggested promoting integrated farming systems to enhance youth income generation, which was ranked first among all recommendations. This was followed by the establishment of skill development centers in rural areas for agri-based training (88.75%) and the facilitation of startup incubation support for youth-led agrienterprises (80.00%), securing second and third ranks respectively.

References

1. Mohanty S, Sahoo B. Youth perception towards ARYA programme activities in Eastern India. J Community Mobil Sustain Dev. 2022;17(2):370-375.
2. Nair S, Reddy R. Respondents' perception towards value addition activities under ARYA. Int J Agric Ext. 2021;9(4):113-118.
3. Patel P, Chauhan NM. Youth responses towards entrepreneurship activities under ARYA. Indian Res J Ext Educ. 2021;21(1):50-55.
4. Rajan P, Venkatesan P. Respondents' attitude towards ARYA skill training activities. J Krishi Vigyan. 2022;10(2):236-240.
5. Sharma A, Kaur R. Perception of female youth towards ARYA livelihood activities. Indian J Rural Dev. 2023;42(2):177-183.
6. Singh RK, Sharma V. Perception of youth on ARYA interventions for livelihood promotion. Indian J Ext Educ. 2022;58(3):90-95.
7. Tiwari RK, Dubey A. Perception of ARYA beneficiaries on capacity building initiatives. Indian J Agric Sci. 2023;93(9):1184-1189.
8. Verma N, Gupta A. Perception of ARYA participants towards technological interventions. J Agric Dev Policy. 2024;34(1):95-101.