Multi-criteria analysis of adoption paths for fertiliser resource optimisation technologies

Abstract

Agriculture in the 21st century faces the challenge of finding the balance needed to mitigate the evolving constraints of climate change  while continuing to perform its functions. In Senegal, agricultural sector policy has been adjusted to reduce the use of chemical fertilizers  by 30%. This policy is in line with the path of agricultural intensification, through microdosing technology, recommended for farms with  low financial capacity. However, beyond the control of fertilizing resources, microdosing technology incorporates costs such as extra  workload, drudgery and know-how, which have a strong influence on the choice of adoption. Indeed, the acceptability of an innovation  depends on two factors, namely perceived usefulness and ease of use. Before introducing a new technology, it is therefore necessary to  study its suitability for users' adoption or rejection criteria. With this in mind, this study uses a multi-criteria evaluation approach to  analyze the adoption pathways for fertilizer resource optimization technologies. The study was carried out on millet in the 2020 and 2021  rainy season, comparing microdosing with current farming practice and the practice popularized in the Senegal cotton basin. Analysis according to the criteria of usefulness (profitability and economic autonomy) and ease of use (arduousness and work time) revealed  three major results. It showed that the common farming practice, although it has no constraints on use, is not profitable and does not  enable producers to be self-sufficient. The analysis also showed that the extension practice is not arduous, does not consume much  labour time, and is also profitable. However, in an environment without input subsidies (currently at 50% for fertilisers), this practice does  not empower farmers. With this practice, the State will always be obliged to bear part of the cost of inputs to relieve producers who  consume more resources than they produce. The practice of optimising resources, using only 40% of the recommended doses of manure  and fertiliser through microdose technology, is profitable and enables producers to be self-sufficient even in an environment without  subsidies. This technology therefore relieves the State of the cost of fertiliser subsidies over the long term, as it produces more than it  consumes in inputs, with a moderately high cost in terms of labour time. This is the main constraint on the adoption of this high- performance fertiliser optimisation technology. Fertiliser optimisation technology could therefore be a lever to enable agriculture to find  the balance needed to adapt to climate change while making a significant contribution to mitigating its effects. But first, it will be  necessary to overcome the labour-intensive nature of manual microdosing technology, which will certainly need to be adapted for better  use, after appropriate mechanisation.