CABI scientists have led new research which reveals a ‘huge variability’ in estimates of the cost efficiency and effectiveness of agricultural extension communication channels such as radio, video, and text messages.
The study, published as a CABI Working Paper, focussed on studies from low-and-middle income countries to draw lessons for sub-Saharan Africa and found various influencing factors including the enabling environment, quality of the communication channel or the relevance and quality of messaging.
Although value-for-money considerations are important, the researchers say, there is a danger that over-emphasis on cost efficiency can undermine delivery of real change. For example, smallholder farmers using biological control agents to fight crop pests and diseases as part of an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach.
Purpose of communication should precede choice of communication channels
The scientists from CABI as well as colleagues from Wageningen University & Research, the Royal Tropical Institute (KIT), and the Netherlands Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality, say the purpose of communication should precede the choice of communication channels based on cost efficiency and cost effectiveness.
Dr Mariam Kadzamira, lead author and Senior Researcher, Agribusiness at CABI, said, “Reaching a large audience can be achieved but unless attention is paid to information quality and context, and whether mass reach channels are appropriate, positive benefits associated with the uptake of good agricultural practices will not be achieved.”
She said a combination of communication channels allows for larger reach and increases overall effectiveness of extension campaigns as multiple types of communication and learning processes are engaged that may trigger behavioural change.
“This justifies extension campaign strategies that combine different channels for different types of communication,” Dr Kadzamira added.
Uptake of best agricultural practices
The researchers highlight that agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa faces many challenges and agricultural productivity remains below its potential. One way of improving productivity is the promotion and uptake of best agricultural practices.
The predominant role of agricultural extension and advisory services in sub-Saharan Africa is to facilitate smallholder farmers’ access to information to equip them to meet new challenges and opportunities and enhancing their resilience and stimulate sustainable agricultural development.
This includes being better prepared to deal with the impacts of climate change as well as shifting market demands, population growth and urbanization.
Communication objective and purpose of the communication
Dr Monica Kansiime, co-author of the paper and CABI’s Deputy Director, Development and Outreach, Africa, said, “If the objective of the communication is primarily to provide information and/or raise awareness, mass media channels prove to be not only cost efficient but also cost effective, say for alerting farmers to pest outbreaks or new pests. This is because they have a moderate to wide reach while raising awareness about not-so-complex messages to large audiences.
“Cost effectiveness of different communication channels varies depending on the communication channel, type of communication and the intensity of interaction with the farmers, but more importantly it depends on the communication objective and purpose of the communication.
“Therefore, although the likelihood of farmers participating in a Farmer Field School, for example, adopting new agricultural practices is higher, the approach has not been considered cost effective owing to its high cost and limited reach.”
Dr Kansiime said that, on the other hand, with lower costs per farmer, field days or video screening are seen as the most effective channels for generating interest and stimulating adoption of similar practices. While, for more complex messages, visits by extension agents with high intensity of interaction can be considered as cost efficient as well as cost effective.
Driven by the aim of the intervention and the resources available
Dr Helena Posthumus, co-author and Project Manager at Wageningen University & Research, said, “The choice of communication channel should thus be driven by the aim of the intervention and the resources available. This implies that the purpose of the communication should precede the choice of communication channel based on cost efficiency and cost effectiveness.
“A combination of communication channels allows for larger reach and increases the overall effectiveness of extension campaigns as multiple types of communication and learning processes are engaged to trigger behavioural change.”
The scientists conclude by recommending that practitioners in sub-Saharan Africa should, therefore, aim to use campaign strategies that combine different communications channels to increase the uptake of agricultural technologies.
This should be coupled, they say, with action research to estimate the cost effectiveness and efficiency of extension campaigns that combine different communication channels, while concurrently assessing reach and uptake as well as subsequent behaviour change.
“Further research should also aim to understand the gendered differences in uptake of agricultural extension information in messages received from different communication channels and/or combinations of different channels,” Dr Posthumus added.
Additional information
Main image: research reveals ‘huge variability’ in estimates of the cost efficiency and effectiveness of agricultural extension communication channels (Credit: CABI).
Full paper reference
Posthumus, H., Romney, D., Dhamankar, M., Flink, I., Kansiime, M.K., Njunge, R., Silvestri, S. and Kadzamira, M.A.T.J. (2025) A review on effective and efficient communication in agricultural extension to enhance adoption of agricultural best practices at scale. CABI Working Paper 35, 27 pp. https://dx.doi.org/10.1079/CABICOMM-62-8186
Development communication and extension
CABI’s unique expertise and global presence around the world allows us to communicate the agricultural knowledge that smallholders need to make lasting change and improve their livelihoods.
Read more here.