Evaluation of the Performance of Information Competencies in the Fertilization and Trade Strategies of Small Banana Producers in Ecuador
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- To what extent do information competencies, organized in five dimensions, contribute to the trade of agricultural production of small banana producers?
- What is the impact of access to and use of communication systems on the efficiency of soil fertilization processes dedicated to banana cultivation?
- Is there a correlation between technical communication and productivity in banana trade and fertilization processes?
2. Literature Review
2.1. Banana Sector in Ecuador
2.2. Fertilization and Marketing Strategies for Small Banana Producers
2.3. Implications of Informational Capabilities in Agricultural Decision-Making
2.4. The Role of Communication Systems in the Agricultural Value Chain
2.5. Accessibility and Use of Information Systems in Developing Countries
2.6. Research and Critical Thinking Gap
2.6.1. Sources of Information
2.6.2. Information Evaluation
2.6.3. Informative
2.6.4. Social
2.6.5. Economic
3. Research Methodology
3.1. Description of the Study Area
3.2. Sampling and Data Collection
3.3. Soil Sample Collection
3.4. Soil Evaluation
3.4.1. Aluminum Concentration
3.4.2. Calcium, Magnesium, and Potassium Concentration
3.4.3. Phosphorus Concentration
3.4.4. Copper and Iron Concentration
3.5. Data Analysis
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Characteristics of Small Banana Farmers
4.2. The Impact of Information Capabilities on Marketing
4.3. Evaluation of Soil Nutrition in Banana Plantations at Microscale
5. Conclusions
5.1. Practical Implications
5.2. Limitations
- The number of producers surveyed could be a limited sample for extrapolating the results of patterns and trends at a statistical level.
- The categories included in the survey may not represent the totality of factors affecting information capabilities.
- The soil analyses were carried out in properties located in two Ecuadorian provinces, so the fertilization levels found do not guarantee their replicability in farms in other regions of the country.
5.3. Future Perspectives
- Expand the representativeness of the study by including a larger number of producers, covering several provinces, and using the stratified sampling technique in order to ensure adequate representation of the subgroups within the banana community.
- To explore the interaction of new factors, such as culture, in the perception and adoption of technological tools for agricultural purposes, to include social aspects not contemplated in this study.
- To extend the geographical scope of the soil analysis to banana farms located in different regions of the country, with the intention of including the analysis of variations in fertilization levels according to the soil and climatic characteristics of each zone.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos [INEC]. Encuesta de Superficie y Producción Agropecuaria Continua ESPAC 2021; Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos [INEC]: Quito, Ecuador, 2022; Available online: https://www.ecuadorencifras.gob.ec/documentos/web-inec/Estadisticas_agropecuarias/espac/espac-2021/Principales%20resultados-ESPAC_2021.pdf (accessed on 5 August 2024).
- Ministerio de Comercio Exterior. Informe Sector Bananero; Ministerio de Comercio Exterior: Quito, Ecuador, 2017; Available online: https://www.produccion.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Informe-sector-bananero-espa%C3%B1ol-04dic17.pdf (accessed on 5 August 2024).
- López, A.; Espinosa, J. Manual de Nutrición y Fertilización Del Banano; International Plant Nutrition Institute: Quito, Ecuador, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Rezabala, Y.; Valdés, F. Comercialización de Productos Agrícolas En La Economía Popular y Solidaria de La Provincia de Manabí. Mikarimin. Rev. Científica Multidiscip. 2024, 10, 101–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schneider, S.; Ferrari, D. Cadeias Curtas, Coopera Ção e Produtos de Qualidade Na Agricultura Familiar: O Processo de Relocalização Da Produção Agroalimentar Em Santa Catarina. Órgano. Rurales Agroind. 2015, 17, 56–71. [Google Scholar]
- Yascaribay, G.; Huerta, M.; Silva, M.; Clotet, R. Performance Evaluation of Communication Systems Used for Internet of Things in Agriculture. Agriculture 2022, 12, 786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rao, N.H. A Framework for Implementing Information and Communication Technologies in Agricultural Development in India. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2007, 74, 491–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Armel Nonvide, G.M. Impact of Information and Communication Technologies on Agricultural Households’ Welfare in Benin. Telecomm. Policy 2023, 47, 102570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naciones Unidas. Brechas y Transformaciones: La Evolución Del Empleo Agropecuario En América Latina; Weller, J., Ed.; CEPAL: Santiago, Chile, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Conti, C.; Zanello, G.; Hall, A. Why Are Agri-Food Systems Resistant to New Directions of Change? A Systematic Review. Glob. Food Sec. 2021, 31, 100576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Álvarez, E.; León, S.; Sánchez, M.; Cusme, B. Evaluación Socioeconómica de La Producción de Plátano En La Zona Norte de La Provincia de Los Ríos. J. Bus. Entrep. 2019, 4, 86–95. [Google Scholar]
- INEC. Tabulados de La Encuesta de Superficie y Producción Agropecuaria Continua ESPAC 2023; INEC: Quito, Ecuador, 2023; Available online: https://www.ecuadorencifras.gob.ec/estadisticas-agropecuarias-2/ (accessed on 6 August 2024).
- Sharavdorj, K.; Byambadorj, S.-O.; Jang, Y.; Cho, J.-W. Application of Magnesium and Calcium Sulfate on Growth and Physiology of Forage Crops under Long-Term Salinity Stress. Plants 2022, 11, 3576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rincón, N.; Segovia, E.; Aguilera, G.; López, A.; Zavarce, E.; Leal, M. Los Pequeños Productores y Su Participación En El Proceso de Comercialización Agrícola. Rev. Fac. Agron. 2004, 21, 172–185. [Google Scholar]
- Njuguna, M.M.; Wambugu, F.M.; Acharya, S.S.; Mackey, M.A. Socio-Economic Impact of Tissue Culture Banana (Musa Spp.) in Kenya through the Whole Value Chain Approach. Acta Hortic. 2010, 879, 77–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mehazabeen, A.; Srinivasan, G.; Radhakrishnan, S. A Constraint Analysis on Production and Marketing of Banana in Andhra Pradesh, India. Plant Arch. 2021, 21 (Suppl. S1), 2215–2216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gebre, G.G.; Rik, E.; Kijne, A. Analysis of Banana Value Chain in Ethiopia: Approaches to Sustainable Value Chain Development. Cogent Food Agric. 2020, 6, 1742516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gutiérrez Cano, L.F.; Zartha Sossa, J.W.; Moreno Sarta, J.F.; Oviedo Lopera, J.C.; Quintero Saavedra, J.I.; Suárez Guzmán, L.M.; Agudelo Tapasco, D.A. National Agricultural Innovation System (NAIS): Diagnosis, Gaps, and Mapping of Actors. Sustainability 2024, 16, 3294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Camacho, A.; Conover, E. The Impact of Receiving SMS Price and Weather Information on Small Scale Farmers in Colombia. World Dev. 2019, 123, 104596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suing, A.; Suárez, J.-C. Profile, Incidence, and Perspectives of Disinformation among Ecuadorians. J. Media 2024, 5, 993–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van den Broeck, K.; Dercon, S. Information Flows and Social Externalities in a Tanzanian Banana Growing Village. J. Dev. Stud. 2011, 47, 231–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muñoz, M.; Mera, R.; Artieda, J.; Vega, V. Tecnologías de La Información y Comunicación En La Agricultura. Uniandes Epistem. 2017, 4, 105–116. [Google Scholar]
- Tovar-Quiroz, A.D. Agricultura 4.0: Uso de Tecnológicas de Precisión y Aplicación Para Pequeños Productores. Inf. Técnico 2023, 87, 64–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nowakunda, K.; Ngambeki, D.; Tushemereirwe, W. Increasing Small-Scale Farmers’ Competitiveness in Banana (Musa Spp.) Production and Marketing. Acta Hortic. 2010, 879, 759–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Neiman, G.; Quaranta, G. Intermediación, Empresas y Mercados de Trabajo En Las Producciones de Vid de La Región de Cuyo, Argentina. Eutopía. Rev. Desarro. Económico Territ. 2016, 9, 83–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mwombe, S.O.L.; Mugivane, F.I.; Adolwa, I.S.; Nderitu, J.H. Evaluation of Information and Communication Technology Utilization by Small Holder Banana Farmers in Gatanga District, Kenya. J. Agric. Educ. Ext. 2014, 20, 247–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marchand, D.; Kettinger, W.; Rollins, J. Information Orientation: People, Technology and the Bottom Line. Sloan Manag. Rev. 2000, 41, 69–80. [Google Scholar]
- Boss de Quadros, C.; Durieux Zucco, F.; Foletto Fiuza, T.; De Souza Farias, F. Fuentes de Información, Credibilidad y Publicidad: Perspectivas Para El Desarrollo de La Comunicación Regional. Anu. Electrónico Estud. Comun. Soc. Disert. 2021, 14, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tandoc, E.C.; Lim, Z.W.; Ling, R. Defining “Fake News”. Digit. J. 2018, 6, 137–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maity, M.; Dass, M.; Malhotra, N.K. The Antecedents and Moderators of Offline Information Search: A Meta-Analysis. J. Retail. 2014, 90, 233–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arias, F. La Credibilidad de Los Contenidos Informativos En Internet Para Los ‘Nativos Digitales’: Estudio de Caso. Palabra Clave 2014, 17, 875–894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michael, R.; Sanson, M. Source Information Affects Interpretations of the News across Multiple Age Groups in the United States. Societies 2021, 11, 119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Björn, G.; Savita, B. Closing the Feedback Loop: Can Technology Bridge the Accountability Gap? The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Goldin, C. Human Capital. In Handbook of Cliometrics; Diebolt, C., Haupert, M., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Magesa, M.M.; Michael, K.; Ko, J. Access and Use of Agricultural Market Information by Smallholder Farmers: Measuring Informational Capabilities. Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries 2020, 86, e12134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moreno Rodríguez, J.M.; Gelvez Pardo, I.M.; Santos Díaz, A.M. Guía de Muestreo de Suelo Para Análisis Microbiológico; Corporación Colombiana de Investigación Agropecuaria (Agrosavia): Bogotá, Colombia, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carrillo, I.; Gómez, A. Métodos de Yuan y Espectrofotometría de Absorción Atómica (E.A.A.) Para Determinación de Aluminio Intercambiable En Suelos Cafeteros Colombianos; Centro Nacional de Investigaciones de Café (Cenicafé): Chinchiná, Caldas, Colombia, 1976. [Google Scholar]
- AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official; AOAC International: Washington DC, USA, 1990. [Google Scholar]
- Carrero, A.; Zambrano, A.; Hernández, E.; Contreras, F.; Machado, D.; Bianchi, G.; Varela, R. Comparación de Dos Métodos de Extracción de Fósforo Disponible En Un Suelo Ácido. Av. Química 2015, 10, 29–33. [Google Scholar]
- Gumbi, N.; Gumbi, L.; Twinomurinzi, H. Towards Sustainable Digital Agriculture for Smallholder Farmers: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2023, 15, 12530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, X.; Wang, G. Impact of Agricultural Cooperatives on Farmers’ Collective Action: A Study Based on the Socio-Ecological System Framework. Agriculture 2024, 14, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zanello, G.; Srinivasan, C.S. Information Sources, ICTs and Price Information in Rural Agricultural Markets. Eur. J. Dev. Res. 2014, 26, 815–831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reid, M.; Aleti, T.; Figueiredo, B.; Sheahan, J.; Hjorth, L.; Martin, D.M.; Buschgens, M. Factors Influencing Seniors’ Anxiety in Using ICT. Soc. Sci. 2024, 13, 496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Porto, R.T.; Sili, M.E. Toma de Decisiones y Gestión Productiva En El Agropecuario Del Noreste de La Pampa (Argentina). Rev. De Econ. E Sociol. Rural. 2020, 58, e198357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ginmen, M. Information Culture and Business Performance. IATUL Q. 1987, 2, 93–106. [Google Scholar]
- Grimshaw, A. Information Culture and Business Performance; Åbo Akademi University: Turku, Finland, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Velázquez López, J.; Juárez Sánchez, J.P.; Ramírez-Valverde, B.; Jiménez Morales, J.; Taboada Gaytán, O.R.; del Valle Sánchez, M. Adoption of Agricultural Technology and Its Influence on Productivity and Competitiveness of Maize in the Central-Eastern Region of the State of Puebla, Mexico. Rev. Geogr. Agrícola 2019, 63, 101–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sadjadi, E.N.; Fernández, R. Challenges and Opportunities of Agriculture Digitalization in Spain. Agronomy 2023, 13, 259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mulyasari, G.; Djarot, I.N.; Sasongko, N.A.; Putra, A.S. Social-Life Cycle Assessment of Oil Palm Plantation Smallholders in Bengkulu Province, Indonesia. Heliyon 2023, 9, e19123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Dimension | Objective | Indicator Code | Description of Indicator |
---|---|---|---|
Sources of information | Promote diversity of information sources to improve people’s search skills | A1 | Print media |
A2 | Electronic media | ||
A3 | Advanced search strategies | ||
Evaluation of information | Identify reliable and relevant sources to improve human capabilities in various contexts. | B1 | Quality of information resources |
B2 | Updating of information | ||
B3 | Recognition of relevant authors | ||
Informative | To develop information skills in people, which allow them to apply information effectively in different contexts | C1 | Recognition of information needs |
C2 | Ability to locate information | ||
C3 | Sales in different markets | ||
C4 | Better prices | ||
Social | Enhance human capital through the enrichment of skills, knowledge, job skills, and the maintenance of good health | D1 | Business and community skills |
D2 | Communication with others | ||
D3 | Empowerment in agricultural marketing | ||
Economic | To increase people’s ability to integrate and participate effectively in the marketplace | E1 | Ease of commercialization |
E2 | Access to different markets | ||
E3 | Investment in agriculture |
Frequency | Relative Frequency | Cumulative | |
---|---|---|---|
Gender | |||
Male | 36 | 72% | 72% |
Female | 14 | 28% | 100% |
Age (years) | |||
18–28 | 9 | 18% | 18% |
29–39 | 7 | 14% | 32% |
40–50 | 13 | 26% | 58% |
51–60 | 8 | 16% | 74% |
>61 | 13 | 26% | 100% |
Marital status | |||
Singer | 8 | 16% | 16% |
Married | 17 | 34% | 50% |
Divorced | 6 | 12% | 62% |
Widowed | 3 | 6% | 68% |
Cohabitant | 16 | 32% | 100% |
Level of education | |||
No education | 4 | 8% | 8% |
Primary school | 9 | 18% | 26% |
Junior high school | 14 | 28% | 54% |
Secondary education | 16 | 32% | 86% |
Higher education | 7 | 14% | 100% |
Agricultural experience (years) | |||
<1 | 5 | 10 | 10% |
1–5 | 6 | 12% | 22% |
5–10 | 6 | 12% | 34% |
10–20 | 9 | 18% | 52% |
>20 | 24 | 48% | 100% |
Ownership status | |||
Leassed | 4 | 8% | 8% |
Partially leased | 6 | 12% | 20% |
Borrowed | 11 | 22% | 42% |
Inherited | 13 | 26% | 68% |
Owned | 16 | 32% | 100% |
Property size (ha) | |||
<1 | 10 | 20% | 20% |
1–3 | 17 | 34% | 54% |
4–6 | 12 | 24% | 78% |
7–9 | 7 | 14% | 92% |
10 | 4 | 8% | 100% |
Dimension | Indicator | Stakeholder Group | |
---|---|---|---|
P.R.G. | P.R.L. | ||
Sources of information | Printed media | 3.80 | 3.44 |
Electronic media | 3.88 | 3.64 | |
Advances search strategies | 1.84 | 2.04 | |
Evaluation of information | Quality of information resources | 3.32 | 3.16 |
Update of information | 3.40 | 3.08 | |
Recognition of relevant authors | 3.32 | 2.52 | |
Informative | Recognition of information needs | 3.48 | 3.48 |
Ability to locate information | 3.40 | 3.44 | |
Sales in different markets | 3.08 | 3.16 | |
Best prices | 3.28 | 3.04 | |
Social | Entrepreneurial and community skills | 3.24 | 3.12 |
Communication with others | 3.76 | 3.52 | |
Empowerment in agricultural marketing | 3.48 | 3.16 | |
Economic | Ease of marketing | 3.44 | 3.32 |
Access to different markets | 3.36 | 3.32 | |
Investment in agriculture | 3.48 | 3.44 |
Mineral | Place | |
---|---|---|
ASG | ASL | |
Al [c/mol(+)/L] | 1.21 ± 0.34 | 0.66 ± 0.15 |
Ca [c/mol(+)/L] | 18.39 ± 1.08 | 27.20 ± 2.01 |
Mg [c/mol(+)/L] | 8.67 ± 0.53 | 2.01 ± 0.45 |
K [c/mol(+)/L] | 0.87 ± 0.14 | 0.19 ± 0.09 |
P (mg/L) | 25.17 ± 4.07 | 12.22 ± 6.68 |
Cu (mg/L) | 6.72 ± 1.50 | 16.38 ± 2.86 |
Fe (mg/L) | 26.47 ± 4.15 | 33.61 ± 4.24 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Luzuriaga-Amador, M.; Novillo-Luzuriaga, N.; Guevara-Viejó, F.; Valenzuela-Cobos, J.D. Evaluation of the Performance of Information Competencies in the Fertilization and Trade Strategies of Small Banana Producers in Ecuador. Sustainability 2025, 17, 868. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17030868
Luzuriaga-Amador M, Novillo-Luzuriaga N, Guevara-Viejó F, Valenzuela-Cobos JD. Evaluation of the Performance of Information Competencies in the Fertilization and Trade Strategies of Small Banana Producers in Ecuador. Sustainability. 2025; 17(3):868. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17030868
Chicago/Turabian StyleLuzuriaga-Amador, Marcela, Nibia Novillo-Luzuriaga, Fabricio Guevara-Viejó, and Juan Diego Valenzuela-Cobos. 2025. "Evaluation of the Performance of Information Competencies in the Fertilization and Trade Strategies of Small Banana Producers in Ecuador" Sustainability 17, no. 3: 868. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17030868
APA StyleLuzuriaga-Amador, M., Novillo-Luzuriaga, N., Guevara-Viejó, F., & Valenzuela-Cobos, J. D. (2025). Evaluation of the Performance of Information Competencies in the Fertilization and Trade Strategies of Small Banana Producers in Ecuador. Sustainability, 17(3), 868. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17030868