A scale to measure the impact of Maharashtra project on climate resilient agriculture

Introduction

Agriculture in Maharashtra is highly vulnerable to climate variability, with smallholder farmers in Vidarbha and Marathwada particularly at risk. Climate change, coupled with high production costs, low profitability, market fluctuations, water scarcity, and declining soil productivity, has significantly impacted agricultural output in these regions. Recurrent droughts have further depleted groundwater and degraded soil health, reducing productivity and affecting smallholder livelihoods. To address these challenges, the Government of Maharashtra, with World Bank support, launched the Project on Climate Resilient Agriculture (Nanaji Deshmukh Krishi Sanjeevani Prakalp) in 2018-2019. The project aims to enhance farmers' adaptive capacity through the promotion of climate-resilient practices, carbon sequestration via tree planting and orchards, and the dissemination of climate-friendly technologies through farm school demonstrations, study tours, and skill-building programs. By integrating environmental sustainability with economic upliftment, the project seeks to enable smallholder farmers in selected districts to effectively adapt to climate change.

Objective

To develop and standardize a scale to measure the Impact of PoCRA project on its beneficiary

Materials and Methods

The present study was conducted to assess the impact of the Maharashtra Project on Climate Resilient Agriculture (PoCRA). The study was carried out in three purposively selected districts-Aurangabad, Osmanabad, and Jalnafrom the Marathwada region during 2022-2023. From these districts, two tehsils were selected, and from each PoCRAimplemented tehsil, 40 beneficiaries were randomly chosen, resulting in a total sample of 240 respondents. To construct the impact scale, Likert's (1932) method for developing a summated rating scale was employed. The following sections provide a detailed account of the procedures undertaken, outlining the process of standardizing the scale for measuring the impact of the PoCRA project.

Results and Discussion

Identification and selection of various components

Seven components-social change, economic change, changes in asset possession, educational change, employment generation, psychological change, and technological change-were identified to assess the impact of the PoCRA project. These components were selected based on a review of the literature and discussions with www.extensionjournal.com extension experts.

Collection and editing of items

Initially, 97 statements reflecting the impact of the PoCRA project on beneficiary farmers were prepared based on a review of the literature, articles, and publications, and in consultation with specialists in extension, economics, and agricultural field officers. These statements were then edited according to the criteria suggested by Thurstone (1946) [9] , Likert (1932), and Edward (1957) [1] . Following this process, 81 statements were retained, all of which were found to be clear, non-ambiguous, and non-factual.

Selection of the judges

These 81 statements were then reviewed by an expert panel to assess their relevancy. To facilitate this, a questionnaire containing all the items was prepared and distributed to 200 judges, including Assistant Professors, Associate Professors, Professors, Scientists, and Extension personnel from State Agricultural Universities, deemed universities, and national institutes such as MANAGE and ICAR, along with clear instructions for evaluation. The questionnaires were sent by post with self-addressed stamped envelopes, emailed, and also personally handed over to the experts. The experts were asked to evaluate each statement for relevancy using a three-point scale: "Most Relevant" (MR) scored 3, "Relevant" (R) scored 2, and "Not Relevant" (NR) scored 1. They were instructed to critically examine each item to determine its appropriateness for measuring the impact of the PoCRA project.

Judges contacted and responses received

Relevancy test

Based on the responses received from the 127 judges, the relevancy weightage, relevancy percentage and mean relevancy score were worked out for all the sixty-one items individually, using the formulae given by Edward (1957) [1] and the computed values are presented in Table 1. Using these three criteria, the statements were screened for their relevancy. Finally, the statements having, more than 0.66 relevancy weightage, more than 66.00 per cent relevancy percentage and more than 2 mean relevancy score were considered relevant to assess the impact. Thus, finally 65 statements were selected for further analysis.

i. Relevancy weightage

Calculation of 't' value (Item analysis)

These 65 statements were subjected to item analysis to delineate the items based on the extent to which they can differentiate the respondent with high impact than the respondent with low impact of PoCRA project. For this, 60 beneficiaries were selected from non-sample area i.e. from Adgaon, Ambarwadi, Brahmngoan, Dahegaon, Dhanora (Bk), Pachalegaon and from Jintur taluka and Arbujwadi, Khali, Khokalewadi, Undegoan of Gangakhed taluka of Parbhani district through direct interview. The beneficiaries were asked to indicate their degree of agreement and disagreement with each statement on the five-point continuum ranging from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree". The scoring pattern adopted was 5 to 1, in which 5 weights to 'strongly agree', 4 to 'agree', 3 to 'undecided', 2 to 'disagree' and 1 to 'strongly disagree' response for positive statements and for negative statements the scoring pattern was reversed. Based upon the total scores, the beneficiaries were arranged in descending order. The top 25.00 per cent of the beneficiaries with their total scores were considered as the high group and the bottom 25.00 per cent were considered as the low group, so as these two groups provide criterion groups in terms of evaluating the individual statements as suggested by Edward (1957) [1] . Thus, out of 60 beneficiaries to whom the items were administered for the item analysis, 15 beneficiaries with highest and 15 beneficiaries with lowest scores were used as criterion groups to evaluate individual items. The critical ratio i.e. the 't' value which is a measure of the extent to which a given statement differentiates between the high and low groups of the beneficiaries for each statement was calculated by using the formula suggested by Edward (1957) [1] .

References

1. Edward AL, Kilpatrick FP. A technique for the construction of attitude scale. J Appl Psychol. 1948;32(4):374-384.
2. Guilford JP. Psychometric methods. Bombay: Tata McGraw-Hill Publication Co. Ltd.; 1954. p. 378-382.
3. Gulkari KD, Dohat MP. Entrepreneurial ability of youth farmers. Guj J Ext Edu. 2022;34(1):6-8. doi:10.56572/gjoee.2022.34.1.0002.
4. Kalasariya N, Patel JK, Patel Y. Knowledge level of trained input dealers about the different modules of training. Guj J Ext Edu. 2022;34(2):70-74.
5. Kerlinger FN. Foundation of behavioural research. New Delhi: Surjeet Publication; 1976. p. 198-204.
6. Khambhala KA. Technological knowledge and attitude of input dealers towards agro service of Junagadh district. Junagadh: Junagadh Agricultural University; 2020. www.extensionjournal.com
7. Patil CN, Patel JK, Bellagi RD, Manunayaka G, Gattupalli NK. A study on group dynamics effectiveness of women's self-help groups members in Ahmedabad district of Gujarat. Indian Journal of Extension Education. 2021;57(1):76-80. doi:10.5958/2454-552X.2021.00004.9.
8. Thurstone LL, Chave EG. The measurement of opinion. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 1928;22:415-430.
9. Thurstone LL. The measurement of attitude. Am J Sociol. 1946;51:39-50.