International Journal of Horticulture, 2024, Vol.14, No.1, 18-30 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/ijh 25 Dalits (6) and other ethnic groups (3) were backward in the adoption. Both gender and ethnicity were not found to statistically affect the adoption status of GAP in the study area. Table 7 Socio-demographic variables distribution to the adoption status of GAP in the survey area, 2022 Adoption level Variables Category Moderate phase Early phase Not in practice Chi-square value p-value Gender Male 10 34 30 0.168 0.919 Female 4 11 9 Ethnicity Brahmin 7 17 13 8.350 0.398 Chhetri 3 6 9 Janajati 2 12 18 Dalit 1 5 2 Others 1 2 0 Source: Field Survey, 2022 2.4.3 Municipalities-wise distribution of the respondents The early phase of adoption of GAPs was observed more in Putalibazaar municipality(36), followed by Bhirkot (6), Waling (2) and Arjunchaupari (1). However, some farmers from Putalibazaar (12) and a few from Arjunchaupari (2) were a little ahead in adoption (Figure 4). Figure 4 Municipalities-wise distribution of GAP adopters in Mandarin in the survey area, 2022 (Source: Field Survey, 2022) 2.5 Standards under GAP adoption 2.5.1. Site history taking and management Among the total respondents, only 15 farmers were known to study the site for risk analysis and 10 followed safety measures on the site before planting (Table 8). This was due to low awareness of GAP among the farmers. Table 8 GAP standards related to the history and management of the site in the survey area, 2022 Description Frequency (Yes) Frequency (No) Study and identification of risk 15 (15.30%) 83 (84.69%) Follow safety measures for risk reduction before planting 10 (10.20%) 88 (89.8%) Source: Field Survey, 2022
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjQ4ODYzNA==