Skip to main content
. 2023 Nov 29;9(12):e23023. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e23023

Table 2.

Descriptive statistics on the adoption of digital agricultural solutions.

Variable
Pooled
Male (n = 828)
Female (n = 371)

Categorical variables Frequency Percentage χ2
Dependent variables
Market-oriented solutions (Yes) 653 54 % 74 % 26 % 13.29***
Finance-oriented solutions (Yes) 50 4.17 % 74 % 26 % 0.59
Input access solutions (Yes) 357 30 % 68 % 32 % 0.23
Extension access solutions (Yes) 388 32 % 65 % 35 % 3.98**
Explanatory variables
Marital status (Married) 983 81 % 70 % 30 % 3.91**
Household head (Yes) 794 66 % 90 % 10 % 467.50***
Migratory status (Migrant) 769 64 % 74 % 26 % 28.45***
Credit access (Yes) 684 57 % 73 % 27 % 12.17***
Group membership (Yes) 624 52 % 76 % 24 % 29.02***
Extension visit (Yes) 576 48 % 76 % 24 % 25.30***
Training (Yes)
640
53 %
75 %
25 %
22.69***
Continuous variables Mean Standard deviation Mean (A) Mean (B) Diff (AB)
Age 43.02 11.99 44.36 40.05 4.32***
Wages 824.16 1093.95 855.02 755.30 99.73
Years of schooling 9.14 5.10 9.65 8.0 1.65***
Farm size 10.95 10.31 12.25 8.02 4.23***
Household income 1287.67 963.23 1371.88 1099.73 272.15***

Note: ** and *** represent statistical significance at 5 % and 1 % levels, respectively. GHS 1 = 10 at the time of the study.