A scoping review on technology applications in agricultural extension.


Journal

PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2023
Historique:
received: 27 06 2023
accepted: 01 10 2023
medline: 8 11 2023
pubmed: 6 11 2023
entrez: 6 11 2023
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Agricultural extension plays a crucial role in disseminating knowledge, empowering farmers, and advancing agricultural development. The effectiveness of these roles can be greatly improved by integrating technology. These technologies, often grouped into two categories-agricultural technology and educational technology-work together to yield the best outcomes. While several studies have been conducted using technologies in agricultural extension programs, no previous reviews have solely examined the impact of these technologies in agricultural extension, and this leaves a significant knowledge gap especially for professionals in this field. For this scoping review, we searched the five most relevant, reliable, and comprehensive databases (CAB Abstracts (Ovid), AGRICOLA (EBSCO), ERIC (EBSCO), Education Source (EBSCO), and Web of Science Core Collection) for articles focused on the use of technology for training farmers in agricultural extension settings. Fifty-four studies published between 2000 and 2022 on the use of technology in agricultural extension programs were included in this review. Our findings show that: (1) most studies were conducted in the last seven years (2016-2022) in the field of agronomy, with India being the most frequent country and Africa being the most notable region for the studies; (2) the quantitative research method was the most employed, while most of the included studies used more than one data collection approach; (3) multimedia was the most widely used educational technology, while most of the studies combined more than one agricultural technology such as pest and disease control, crop cultivation and harvesting practices; (4) the impacts of technology in agricultural extension were mostly mixed, while only the educational technology type had a statistically significant effect or impact of the intervention outcome. From an analysis of the results, we identified potential limitations in included studies' methodology and reporting that should be considered in the future like the need to further analyze the specific interactions between the two technology types and their impacts of some aspects of agricultural extension. We also looked at the characteristics of interventions, the impact of technology on agricultural extension programs, and current and future trends. We emphasized the gaps in the literature that need to be addressed.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37930967
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0292877
pii: PONE-D-23-20077
pmc: PMC10627468
doi:

Types de publication

Review Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e0292877

Informations de copyright

Copyright: © 2023 Xu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Références

Front Vet Sci. 2021 Jun 28;8:611263
pubmed: 34262959
Womens Stud Int Forum. 2019 Sep-Oct;76:102264
pubmed: 31853161
PLoS One. 2021 Oct 28;16(10):e0259319
pubmed: 34710166
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 25;12(1):e0169557
pubmed: 28122005
Nature. 2017 Apr 26;544(7651):S21-S23
pubmed: 28445450
Science. 2011 Sep 2;333(6047):1289-91
pubmed: 21885781
World Dev. 2023 Jan;161:106089
pubmed: 36597414
Aust Vet J. 2006 Nov;84(11):379-83
pubmed: 17092321

Auteurs

Zhihong Xu (Z)

Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communications, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America.

Anjorin Ezekiel Adeyemi (AE)

Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communications, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America.

Emily Catalan (E)

Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communications, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America.

Shuai Ma (S)

Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communications, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America.

Ashlynn Kogut (A)

Department of Teaching, Learning, and Culture, Texas A&M University College, Station, Texas, United States of America.

Cristina Guzman (C)

Department of Agricultural Leadership, Education and Communications, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America.

Articles similaires

Animals Lung India Sheep Transcriptome
India Carbon Sequestration Environmental Monitoring Carbon Biomass
Zea mays Triticum China Seasons Crops, Agricultural
Ethiopia Conservation of Natural Resources Environmental Monitoring Soil Soil Erosion

Classifications MeSH