Search results

Procuring relief products and services is a challenging process for humanitarian organizations (HOs), yet it accounts for approximately 65% of relief operations’ costs (Moshtari et al., 2021). This paper aims to examine how procurement internal controls, materials and purchasing procedure standardization influence information integration and procurement performance.

In this study, partial least square structural equation models and multigroup analysis were used to analyze data collected from 170 HOs.

Procurement internal controls and material and purchasing procedure standardization fully mediate between information integration and procurement performance.

The study focuses only on HOs. Since humanitarian procurement projects take place over a period of several years, it is difficult to capture the long-term effects of information integration, procurement internal controls, material and purchasing procedure standardization and procurement performance. In this regard, a longitudinal study could be undertaken, provided that the required resources are available.

Procurement managers should implement information integration practices within acceptable procurement internal controls and standardize material and purchasing procedures to boost procurement performance.

By integrating information through procurement internal controls and standardizing material and purchasing procedures, procurement performance in a humanitarian setting can be systematically optimized.

This study aims to examine smallholder farmers’ perceptions toward the adoption of climate-smart agriculture (CSA) in smallholder farmers in the Upper Blue Nile Highlands of Ethiopia. Available research focused on profitability and economic constraints alone, disregarding the farmers’ perception of the adoption of CSA innovations. There is relatively little empirical work on farmers’ perceptions of innovations. Hence, a critical research gap that will strengthen CSA innovation research and practice includes understanding farmers’ perceptions about CSA innovations and how these perceptions interact with their adoption.

A cross-sectional household survey was conducted among 424 smallholder farmers selected from five agro-ecosystems. A structured questionnaire was used to collect primary data and a review of literature and documents was used to collect secondary data. The study used a multivariate probit model to examine perception factors affecting the likelihood of adopting multiple CSA innovations. The dependent variables were eight CSA innovations, while the independent variables were crafted from the three pillars of CSA.

Major CSA innovations adopted by farmers include improved variety, crop residue management, crop rotation, compost, row planting, soil and water conservation, intercropping and agroforestry. Farmers’ perception toward CSA innovations includes: CSA innovations sustainably increase productivity and income; enhance soil fertility; diversify livestock feed and energy sources; reduce soil erosion, weed infestation and crop failure; enhance soil organic matter, reduce chemical fertilizer use and rehabilitate land. Farmers’ positive perceptions of the benefits of CSA innovations for increasing crop productivity, reducing agricultural vulnerability to climate change and lowering farm greenhouse gas emissions have boosted adoption.

Farmers’ perceptions toward CSA innovations must be enhanced to increase the adoption of CSA innovations in the smallholder agriculture system. The CSA innovation scale-up strategies should focus on farmers’ perception of CSA innovation benefits toward food security, climate change adaption and mitigation outcomes. Awareness of CSA needs the close collaboration of public extension as well as local institutions such as farmers’ training centers.

The study adopts a multivariate probit model that models farmers’ simultaneous CSA innovation choices. Hence, this study contributes to the literature in four significant areas. First, it argues for differential treatment of the perception of smallholder farmers about innovations is needed. Second, it recognizes the interdependence of the adoption of innovations. Third, it directly assesses the farmers’ perception, while others use proxies to measure it. Finally, there are limited or no studies that address the perception of innovations within the lens of adopter perception theory.