Construction of a scale for measuring the level of satisfaction of the members of Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs)

Introduction

Agriculture is the backbone of the Indian economy, playing a critical role in ensuring livelihood security, particularly in rural areas where the majority of the population depends on farming and allied activities. These livelihoods encompass both farm and non-farm activities, helping households secure food and income. The sector contributes approximately 18.3 per cent to India's GDP and provides employment to nearly 58.3 per cent of the population (PIB, 2023) [11] . Despite its importance, Indian agriculture faces significant challenges, including shrinking per capita land due to fragmentation of holdings, depletion of natural resources, growing competition for land from urbanization and industrialization, and decreasing interest of rural youth in farming-more than 40 per cent of whom express a desire to leave agriculture. A majority of Indian farmers are small and marginal, with 86 per cent owning less than two hectares of land. On average, a farmer manages only around 1.16 hectares, making it difficult to adopt modern practices, enhance productivity, or achieve sustainable incomes. In response to these challenges, Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs) or Farmer Producer Companies (FPCs) have emerged as a promising solution. By pooling resources, accessing better technology, credit, and markets, and benefiting from economies of scale, FPO members can overcome the limitations of individual farming. FPOs also help reduce dependence on intermediaries in agricultural marketing, ensuring farmers receive a fairer share of consumer prices. Through collective action and bargaining power, farmers can improve productivity, income, and participation in the market, effectively transforming smallholders into more competitive agri-entrepreneurs (Jose et al., 2023) [7] . While the structural and economic benefits of FPOs are widely recognized, an equally important aspect is the perception and satisfaction of the members themselves. The level of satisfaction among FPO members reflects how effectively the organization meets their expectations in areas such as transparency, support in inputs and marketing, access to services, training, and financial benefits. Understanding member satisfaction is crucial for assessing the overall performance and sustainability of FPOs, as satisfied members are more likely to actively participate, contribute to collective goals, and sustain long-term engagement. This study, therefore, focuses on evaluating the level of satisfaction of FPO members, providing insights www.extensionjournal.com into both the successes and challenges faced by these organizations from the members' perspective.

Specific objective of the study

To develop a scale to measure the level of satisfaction of members of Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs).

Identification of Dimensions

The dimensions of the level of satisfaction of members of FPOs were carried out using a scale developed on the basis of the SERVQUAL model (Zeithaml et al., 1988), with necessary modifications to suit the FPO context. Accordingly, five core dimensions were considered most appropriate for assessing the level of satisfaction of members of FPOs, namely: Tangibles, Reliability, Responsiveness, Assurance, and Empathy.

Collection and edition of items

A total of 85 statements related to the level of satisfaction of members of FPOs were collected from literature and suggestions from experts in extension education. These statements were then edited using the 14 criteria suggested by Thurstone (1946) [13] , Likert (1932) [9] , and Edwards (1957) [3] . After editing, 50 statements were retained, which were clear & non-ambiguous.

Relevancy of the statements

A total of 50 statements were initially developed to measure the level of satisfaction of members of Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs). These statements were sent to a panel of 100 experts, comprising Assistant Professors, Associate Professors, Scientists, and Extension personnel from State Agricultural Universities, Deemed Universities, as well as national institutions such as MANAGE and ICAR. The experts were instructed to assess the relevance of each statement using a 5-point Likert scale: Most Relevant (5), Highly Relevant (4), Relevant (3), Less Relevant (2), and Least Relevant (1). Out of the 100 experts consulted, each statement was carefully reviewed. Those that were ambiguous, unclear, or considered irrelevant were removed, following the established guidelines of Edwards (1969) [4] , Thurstone and Chave (1929) [13] , and Raj and Thomas (2022). The remaining statements were then rigorously evaluated using the Item-Content Validity Index (I-CVI), as recommended by Lynn (1986), to ensure their clarity and relevance. The Relevancy Score (%) of each statement was then calculated using the formula:

The 50 items were checked using the Item-Content Validity Index (I-CVI) method (Lynn, 1986). Items with a CVI score of 0.85 or higher were retained, as suggested by Polit and Beck (2006). After this process, 37 items were finalized under five dimensions.

Item Analysis (Index of Discrimination)

To analyze the items, the critical ratio (t-value) was calculated. This helps to find out how well each statement separates respondents with high satisfaction from those with low satisfaction, following the method given by Edwards (1957) [3] . A total of 37 statements were tested to see if they were suitable for measuring the level of satisfaction of members of FPOs in Odisha and Kerala. For this, 72 farmers from non-sample areas were selected. The farmers rated each statement on a five-point scale (Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree). Positive statements were scored 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, while negative statements were scored in the reverse order. Based on their total scores, the farmers were ranked from highest to lowest. The top 25% were placed in the high group and the bottom 25% in the low group. The 't' value formula was used to determine which statements could effectively distinguish between groups with high and low perceptions. The t-value (critical ratio) was then calculated for each statement using the following formula, As a result of the analysis, a total of 34 statements demonstrating t-values greater than 2.110 at the 0.05 level of significance were retained for inclusion in the scale. These items were finalized and categorized under five key dimensions of member satisfaction: Tangibles (7 items), Reliability (7 items), Responsiveness (8 items), Assurance (7 items), and Empathy (5 items).

Reliability

The reliability of the developed measurement scale was assessed to ensure the consistency and precision of the scores. Cronbach's Alpha and the split-half method were employed to evaluate internal consistency, with the splithalf reliability coefficient calculated using the Spearman-Brown formula. The results indicated excellent reliability of the scale. Specifically, Cronbach's Alpha (α) was 0.955, reflecting a high level of internal consistency. Similarly, the split-half reliability coefficients, calculated using both Spearman-Brown and Guttmann formulas, were 0.

Results and Discussion

The EFA revealed satisfactory item loading across the five dimensions, with all factor loadings above 0.60. Each subdimension exhibited values exceeding the recommended convergent validity benchmark of 0.60 (Hair et al., 2020), signifying that the latent constructs effectively captured sufficient variance. The obtained values were as follows: Tangibles (0.868), Reliability (0.795), Responsiveness (0.770), Assurance (0.764), and Empathy (0.643). The overall AVE stood at 0.768, confirming the convergent validity of the scale (Fornell & Larcker, 1981) [5] .

The internal consistency of the final 34-item scale was high, with a Cronbach's Alpha of 0.955, indicating excellent reliability (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994) [10] . Split-half reliability was also significant, with Spearman-Brown coefficients of 0.949 (equal length) and 0.949 (unequal length), and a Guttmann split-half coefficient of 0.949. The scales demonstrated strong internal consistency, surpassing commonly accepted reliability thresholds (DeVellis, 2017) [2] , consistent with the high reliability reported by Lade et al.

(2024) [8] in their study on FPC beneficiaries.

References

1. Dechamma S, Krishnamurthy B, Lakshminarayan MT, Shivamurthy M. Development of the scale to measure the attitude of farmers towards Farmer Producer Organizations (FPOs). Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci. 2020;9(11):3705-3711.
2. DeVellis RF. Scale Development: Theory and Applications. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications; 2017.
3. Fornell C, Larcker DF. Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res. 1981;18(1):39-50.
4. Frankenberger TR, McCaston MK. The household livelihood security concept. Food Nutr Agric. 1998;12(3):30-35.
5. Jose AE, Jayalekshmi G, Lade AH, Karde R. Sociopsychological constructs and perceived economic variables on entrepreneurial behavior among Farmer Producer Organization members in Kerala: a comprehensive analysis. Asian J Agric Ext Econ Soc. 2023;41(9):241-250.
6. Lade AH, Ahire RD, Kausadikar KD. Construction of a scale for measuring consequences of farmer producer company on its beneficiaries. Int J Agric Ext Soc Dev. 2024;7(4):435-440.
7. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric Theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.
8. Sharma NR. Construction of scale for perception of farmers towards Farmer Producer Organization. Gujarat J Ext Educ. 2023;35(1):34-37.