202
however, is largely lacking in empirical evidence. Similarly, the burgeoning literature that analyzes the adoption of CSA-related innovations (Lipper et al. 2014;
Zilberman et al. 2018) has not yet considered farmer entrepreneurship as a significant influence on such processes.
Our study seeks to fill this gap in the literature by collecting evidence on the relationship between entrepreneurial mindsets and an openness to agricultural innovation.
To explore why certain farmers innovate and adapt, this chapter (i) proposes an
adapted measurement model for farmer entrepreneurship, and (ii) investigates quantitatively the influence of farmer entrepreneurship and farm characteristics on three
types of innovation: “product innovation,” which here refers to the use of new farm
inputs, transformation of farm output into new products, or production according to a
new quality standard; “process innovation,” which involves adopting new farm practices, embracing new ways of farm organization, or putting new information into use;
and “market innovation,” which entails opening a new market channel.
We ground our study in interviews with farmers associated with Ugandan MSPs
involved in coffee and honey value chains. Recently, MSPs have attempted to introduce CSA practices not only in coffee and honey but also in other sectors (Bomuhangi
et al. 2016; Sabiiti et al. 2016). This study has implications for agents in MSPs—
farmers and their representatives, researchers, value-chain partners and policymakers—or similar multi-actor organizations who wish to promote the adoption of
CSA or other novel practices. By understanding and encouraging farmer entrepreneurship, MSPs may be able to stimulate a broad range of agricultural innovation.
17.2 Methods
For this study, a survey questionnaire was completed by 152 farmers in four sub- counties
(Mukoto, Namabya, Bukhofu and Namboko) of Uganda’s Manafwa district. The questionnaire covered the farm’s characteristics and the farmers’ entrepreneurial orientation.
Farm characteristics included demographics (age, gender, education), farm size and
access to resources (both tangible resources such as credit, fertilizers, etc. and intangible
resources such as intellectual capital). To assess farmer entrepreneurship, we selected
four key dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation: innovativeness, risk-taking, proactiveness and entrepreneurial intentions. Finally, farmers’ innovation was measured in
line with the empirical analyses by (Wu and Pretty 2004) on product innovation, (Yang
2013) on process innovation, and (Johne 1999) on market innovation (see Table 17.1).
All questionnaire items were organized on a 5-point Likert scale.
As a first step, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed. This allows
one to assess whether a measurement model for a latent or intangible variable (such
as entrepreneurial orientation) is appropriately reflected by a questionnaire
(Harrington 2009). The following indices help in this assessment: chi-squared test,
the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), goodness of fit index (GFI)
and the comparative fix index (CFI). The CFA confirmed that slightly adapted measures of innovativeness, proactiveness and entrepreneurial intentions suited the
C. L. Barzola Iza et al.
however, is largely lacking in empirical evidence. Similarly, the burgeoning literature that analyzes the adoption of CSA-related innovations (Lipper et al. 2014;
Zilberman et al. 2018) has not yet considered farmer entrepreneurship as a significant influence on such processes.
Our study seeks to fill this gap in the literature by collecting evidence on the relationship between entrepreneurial mindsets and an openness to agricultural innovation.
To explore why certain farmers innovate and adapt, this chapter (i) proposes an
adapted measurement model for farmer entrepreneurship, and (ii) investigates quantitatively the influence of farmer entrepreneurship and farm characteristics on three
types of innovation: “product innovation,” which here refers to the use of new farm
inputs, transformation of farm output into new products, or production according to a
new quality standard; “process innovation,” which involves adopting new farm practices, embracing new ways of farm organization, or putting new information into use;
and “market innovation,” which entails opening a new market channel.
We ground our study in interviews with farmers associated with Ugandan MSPs
involved in coffee and honey value chains. Recently, MSPs have attempted to introduce CSA practices not only in coffee and honey but also in other sectors (Bomuhangi
et al. 2016; Sabiiti et al. 2016). This study has implications for agents in MSPs—
farmers and their representatives, researchers, value-chain partners and policymakers—or similar multi-actor organizations who wish to promote the adoption of
CSA or other novel practices. By understanding and encouraging farmer entrepreneurship, MSPs may be able to stimulate a broad range of agricultural innovation.
17.2 Methods
For this study, a survey questionnaire was completed by 152 farmers in four sub- counties
(Mukoto, Namabya, Bukhofu and Namboko) of Uganda’s Manafwa district. The questionnaire covered the farm’s characteristics and the farmers’ entrepreneurial orientation.
Farm characteristics included demographics (age, gender, education), farm size and
access to resources (both tangible resources such as credit, fertilizers, etc. and intangible
resources such as intellectual capital). To assess farmer entrepreneurship, we selected
four key dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation: innovativeness, risk-taking, proactiveness and entrepreneurial intentions. Finally, farmers’ innovation was measured in
line with the empirical analyses by (Wu and Pretty 2004) on product innovation, (Yang
2013) on process innovation, and (Johne 1999) on market innovation (see Table 17.1).
All questionnaire items were organized on a 5-point Likert scale.
As a first step, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed. This allows
one to assess whether a measurement model for a latent or intangible variable (such
as entrepreneurial orientation) is appropriately reflected by a questionnaire
(Harrington 2009). The following indices help in this assessment: chi-squared test,
the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), goodness of fit index (GFI)
and the comparative fix index (CFI). The CFA confirmed that slightly adapted measures of innovativeness, proactiveness and entrepreneurial intentions suited the
C. L. Barzola Iza et al.