Farmer Evaluation and Acceptance of Agricultural Advisory Services in a Pluralistic Extension System: Evidence from Tamil Nadu, India
A. M. Juno
Department of Agricultural Extension & Rural Sociology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu – 641003, India.
M.A. Vennila
*
ICAR–Krishi Vigyan Kendra, Papparapatty, Dharmapuri, Tamil Nadu – 636809, India.
A. Janaki Rani
Department of Agricultural Extension & Rural Sociology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu – 641003, India.
S. Kokilavani
Agro Climate Research Centre, Directorate of Crop Management, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu – 641003, India.
R. Gangai Selvi
Department of Physical Sciences & IT, Agricultural Engineering College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu – 641003, India.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Background: Agricultural advisory services have evolved into pluralistic, multi-actor systems in which farmers behaviourally evaluate advice from formal and informal sources based on relevance, trust, and contextual fit, shaping the acceptance of agricultural recommendations.
Aims: This study examined how farmers’ evaluation of advisory services influences the acceptance of agricultural recommendations within a pluralistic extension system.
Study Design: The study employed an ex-post facto research design.
Place and Duration of Study: The study was conducted in Coimbatore district of Tamil Nadu, India, between January and March 2026.
Methodology: Primary data were collected from 120 farmers selected through snowball sampling across pluralistic advisory environments. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, Friedman test, Chi-square analysis, Spearman rank correlation, multiple regression analysis, and Garrett ranking technique.
Results: The findings revealed that informal advisory actors, particularly input dealers and progressive farmers, were accessed more frequently than formal advisory sources. About 71.7% of farmers reported high acceptance of recommendations from informal advisory actors, while only 33.3% reported high acceptance of formal advisory recommendations. Chi-square analysis indicated a significant association between perceived advisory quality and acceptance of informal recommendations (χ² = 14.378, P= .001). Spearman correlation analysis showed that relevance had the strongest positive association with informal acceptance behaviour (r = .498, P < .01), while regression analysis identified relevance as the most significant predictor of acceptance (β = .433, P= .043). Trusted source emerged as the most important reason influencing acceptance decisions.
Conclusion: The findings indicate that advisory effectiveness within pluralistic systems is shaped not only by technical quality of recommendations but also by contextual relevance, trust, and relational dynamics embedded within advisory networks. Strengthening farmer-centred and context-responsive advisory approaches and improving collaboration between formal and informal advisory actors may enhance advisory effectiveness within similar pluralistic extension contexts.
Keywords: Agricultural advisory services, pluralistic extension systems, farmer acceptance behaviour, informal advisory networks, advisory quality, extension effectiveness