Crop Protection 98 (2017) 191e197

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Crop Protection
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cropro

Crop protection services by Plant Clinics in Iran: An evaluation

through rice farmers' satisfaction
Reza Ghiasi a, Mohammad Sadegh Allahyari a, *, Christos A. Damalas b, **, Jafar Azizi a,
Mohammad Abedi c
a
Department of Agricultural Management, Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran
b
Department of Agricultural Development, Democritus University of Thrace, GR-682 00 Orestiada, Greece
c
Department of Agricultural Management, Eslamshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Plant Clinics have been founded in many developing countries as a cost-effective way to provide plant
Received 5 January 2017 protection advice to smallholders who have limited access to consulting services. However, studies
Received in revised form concerning farmers' satisfaction with the Plant Clinics services are scarce in the literature. The objective
16 March 2017
of the present study was to examine farmers' familiarity, willingness to use, and willingness to pay for
Accepted 17 March 2017
services offered by Plant Clinics in Guilan Province of northern Iran. A significant portion of the farmers
(44%) had a fair level of familiarity with Plant Clinics and most farmers (54%) showed willingness to use
their services. Farmers evaluated customer service (i.e., the level of services offered by the Plant Clinics
Keywords:
Agricultural extension services
personnel) and service relevance (i.e., the relevance of Plant Clinics services with farmers' needs) of Plant
Service quality Clinics with the highest satisfaction rates. The most important factors explaining the variance of farmers'
Customer service willingness to use the Plant Clinics services were service relevance, service usefulness, familiarity with
Plant Clinics services, service quality, and education level of the farmers, which together explained 68.4%
of the variance of farmers' willingness to use the Plant Clinics services. The variables service relevance
(services that are relevant with farmers' needs), age (young farmers), land area (large farmers), and
familiarity with Plant Clinics (knowledge about the responsibilities of these centers and contact with
them) had a positive impact on farmers' willingness to pay for the Plant Clinics services. However,
farming experience (experienced farmers) had a negative impact on farmers' willingness to pay. Overall,
Plant Clinics have a big potential to support decision-making on technical, operational, and strategic
matters in the study area, but some farmers were less familiar with them. Farmers' familiarity with the
Plant Clinics services should be promoted along with further improving their services.
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
In agricultural ecosystems, pests, plant pathogens, and weeds
pose a major challenge to crop productivity and global food security
(Damalas, 2016). The damage inflicted on agricultural produce by
pests would be more severe by almost 30% than that is at present,
without the use of pesticides and non-chemical control methods.
These hazardous factors, including pests, diseases, and weeds,
inflict heavy losses to rice in Iran both in the field and also during
* Corresponding author.
** Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: allahyari@iaurasht.ac.ir (M.S. Allahyari), chris.damalas@yahoo.
gr, cdamalas@agro.duth.gr (C.A. Damalas).
storing. Blast, with the causal agent of Magnaporthe grisea (Hebert)
Barr, is considered to be the most important disease of rice in Iran,
resulting in severe losses to susceptible rice cultivars (Mousanejad
et al., 2010). Also, the Asiatic rice borer, Chilo suppressalis (Walker)
(Lepidoptera: Crambidae), is a major pest problem to rice produc-
tion in rice-growing areas of Iran, causing about 15% yield losses
annually (Noorhosseini et al., 2010; Abdollahzadeh et al., 2016).
Evidently, effective pest management is essential for maintain-
ing or increasing rice productivity. However, conditions in devel-
oping countries are often very different from those in the
developed countries. Approaches suitable for developed countries
often do not work well in developing countries. Although chemical
control has turned out to be effective on most harmful agents and
has revolutionized crop production, its costs and adverse impacts
on human health, the environment, and the quality of food cannot

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2017.03.016
0261-2194/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
192 R. Ghiasi et al. / Crop Protection 98 (2017) 191e197
be neglected (Damalas, 2009; Damalas and Eleftherohorinos, 2011;
Razzaghi Borkhani et al., 2013). Consequently, pest control methods
that need less or no use of chemicals came into focus (Ranjbar et al.,
2007). However, alternative pest control strategies often require
more knowledge than chemical strategies and different skills are
also needed by farmers (Allahyari et al., 2009; Allahyari, 2012; Khan
and Damalas, 2015). Close involvement of extension workers with
both farmers and researchers to identify farmers' knowledge and
practices and to assist the training of farmers in the new ap-
proaches is essential.
Agricultural extension workers often spend considerable time
responding to questions dealing with crop protection. This is
important as agricultural extension services must be able to
anticipate such cases, so that they can quickly identify potential
problems and thus advise farmers on the best ways of dealing with
them. This also means that the knowledge available in national
research centers must be decentralized in a comprehensible
manner. Acting as an intermediary, between research centers and
national agencies on the one hand and local extension workers and
farmers on the other, is the main role of ‘Plant Clinics’. Such facil-
ities provide three main functions: correct diagnosis of the problem
and prescription of the treatment, training of local extension
workers, and experimentation under local conditions (Boa et al.,
2016). The most important task remains the diagnosis and pre-
scription, for which clinics must have adequate personnel and
equipment.
Plant Clinics have been founded in many developing countries
since 2003 as a cost-effective way to provide smallholders with
plant protection advice. Plant Clinics are another approach of car-
rying out extension services. Unlike the conventional extension
system, where extension agents visit individual fields, farmers
come to the Plant Clinics (Bentley et al., 2011). The concept was first
proposed by the CABI-led initiative, Global Plant Clinic (GPC), in
Bolivia and was soon adopted in countries like Bangladesh, Uganda,
and Nicaragua (Boa, 2010; Danielsen and Kelly, 2010). Plant Clinics
are not a new idea and the United States and other developed
countries have effective plant health systems that serve farmers
and have done so for many years (Campbell et al., 1999). In the
context of developing countries, however, Plant Clinics are a ‘new’
method for farmers and rural communities.
Because Plant Clinics vary in how they operate and the services
they offer (Boa et al., 2016), a brief description of Plants Clinics in
Iran is provided below. Plant Clinics in Iran are units founded by
individuals or legal entities of the non-governmental sector, which
are responsible for examining and diagnosing crop pests and dis-
eases and recommending appropriate tools and practices for their
control in accordance with the delegated authority. The re-
sponsibilities of Plant Clinics in Iran include i) examination of crop
pests and diseases and prescription of pest management practices,
ii) laboratorial examination for diagnosing harmful pests in agri-
cultural ecosystems, iii) field visits and inspection of pest problems,
advisory and guidance of farmers for the management of plant
pathogens, iv) promotion of functions of the crop protection net-
works and provision of support regarding natural enemies of plant
pathogens, and v) implementation of research, extension, and
applied projects of plant protection in coordination with govern-
mental authorities of the province. Since all responsibilities of the
crop protection networks are performed by Plant Clinics, re-
sponsibilities mainly focus on visits of farms and gardens as well as
field activities. Nonetheless, in case there is a need for laboratorial
examinations, Plant Clinics can perform them. Therefore, their ac-
tivities can be regarded as a combination of field and laboratory
activities.
Eight years after the establishment of these clinics, there are few
studies on farmers' satisfaction with their services. Also, most of
these studies have focused on consulting firms, agro-technical
firms, and farmers' satisfaction with these firms (Moazen et al.,
2013; Abbasi et al., 2015; Sulaiman and Sadamate, 2000; Rivera
and Gary, 2000). A comprehensive assessment of Plant Clinics ac-
cess requires more information about the specific context,
including feedback from different types of Plant Clinics users (in
terms of gender, age, wealth and ethnic groups, level of education,
etc.) (Danielsen and Matsiko, 2016). Quality criteria for Plant Clinics
include technical quality, timeliness, staff attitude, feasibility of
advice, clinic location, materials, organization and outreach
(Danielsen and Kelly, 2010). Plant Clinics need an internal quality
control system as well as appropriate quality practices to enable
organizations to continuously monitor their performance. Effec-
tiveness is realized when consulting services can influence farmers'
decisions about changing their current practices (Danielsen et al.,
2013).
The present study tried to answer the question: are rice farmers
in Guilan province satisfied by the services of Plant Clinics, are they
willing to use those services, and what are the main factors un-
derpinning farmers' willingness to use those services? The results
can be a guideline for the clinic owners to seek approaches to
improve the productivity in their respective clinics and gain a
better perspective about farmers' needs and challenges so that they
can provide more appropriate and useful services. This can, in turn,
boost farmers' satisfaction with Plant Clinics.
2. Methodology
The statistical population composed of all farmers covered by
Pests and Plant Diseases Care Networks (PPDCNs) in Guilan Prov-
ince covered by Plant Clinics (N ¼ 40,304). The least sample size for
the study was estimated to 480 farmers, based on the least sample
size table proposed by Bartlett et al. (2001), considering a confi-
dence level of 95%. Also, the margin of error used in this table was
3% for continuous data. Due to low return rate in studies of this
kind, an additional 10% of the target population was included to the
initial sample size to ensure participation of the required sample
size. To evenly distribute the questionnaire throughout the prov-
ince, the sample size was divided, among different regions covered
by PPDCNs and different villages, proportionally to the number of
farmers (proportional-to-size cluster sampling). Face-to-face in-
terviews were conducted by trained experts. Before starting the
survey, we chose experts from different areas and the first author
gave detailed instructions about how to administer the question-
naires. Each questionnaire took about 30 min to be filled out. Of the
528 questionnaires distributed throughout the province, 494 were
fully completed and usable. Eleven questionnaires were found
unusable and were removed from the final analysis.
The questionnaire had three pages and contained four distinct
sections. Section 1 was devoted to respondents' demographic data,
including residence (city or village), age, gender, education level,
income, cultivated land area, land ownership type, and familiarity
with Plant Clinics. Familiarity with Plant Clinics services means that
farmers know about the role of these centers and have contact with
them. Section 2 was related to farmers' willingness to use the ser-
vices of Plant Clinics, including 17 items for its estimation on the
basis of a five-point Likert-type scale (from very low to very high).
Of those items of Section 2, 10 were positive and 7 were negative.
Section 3 was about farmers' satisfaction with the service of Plant
Clinics divided into four subsections: ‘service relevance’ with four
items, ‘service quality’ with six items, ‘service usefulness’ with six
items, and ‘customer services’ with eight items. Farmers' satisfac-
tion with Plant Clinics services is defined as the degree of satis-
faction of farmers with respect to service relevance, service quality,
service usefulness and customer service offered by Plant Clinic
 R. Ghiasi et al. / Crop Protection 98 (2017) 191e197 193

programs. The satisfaction scale (service relevance, service quality, Table 1

service usefulness and customer service) was adapted from Basic demographic information of the farmers surveyed.

Saravanan et al. (2009). Section 3 had 24 items measured on a five- Variable Frequency Percentage Mean SD
point Likert-type scale (from very low to very high). Of those items Age (years) 52.05 11.51
of Section 3, 12 were positive and 12 were negative. Section 4 Up to 30 6 1.2
contained nine items regarding activities for which farmers had From 31 to 40 75 15.2
willingness to pay for. For these items, we used a 3-point scale for From 41 to 50 154 31.2
From 51 to 60 146 29.6
rating. The validity of the questionnaire was confirmed by a panel of
Above 60 113 22.8
experts and was modified according to their comments (content
validity). Its reliability was estimated by Cronbach's alpha. For this Farming experience (years) 28.94 13.42
Up to 10 45 9.1
reason, the questionnaire was distributed in Ramsar of Mazandaran From 11 to 20 126 25.5
Province due to its close similarity with Guilan Province. Then, From 21 to 30 131 26.5
Cronbach's alpha was found to be between 0.834 and 0.901 for More than 30 192 38.9
different sections, showing its high reliability. Data were processed Gender
by SPSS19 software package and were analyzed descriptively and Male 435 88.8
inferentially. Female 55 11.2
Frequency distribution, percentages, means, and dispersion No response 4 0.8

measures were used in the descriptive part. The general willingness Educational level
to use the services of Plant Clinics was estimated and the re- Illiterate 84 17.1
Elementary school 117 23.8
spondents were categorized into four groups (poor, fair, good,
Intermediate school 116 23.6
excellent) by the ‘Interval of Standard Deviation from the Mean’ High school 135 27.4
(ISDM) using the following equation (Allahyari et al., 2016): Academic degree 40 8.1
No response 2 0.4
A ¼ poor : A < Mean  SD
Land area 1.54 1.15
B ¼ fair : Mean  SD  B  Mean Up to 1.0 ha 236 47.9
(1)
C ¼ good : Mean < C  Mean þ SD From 1.1 to 2.0 ha 165 33.5
D ¼ excellent : Mean þ SD < D From 2.1 to 3.0 ha 50 10.1
More than 3 ha 42 8.5
Multivariate regression was used to determine the share of each No response 1 0.2
independent variable in accounting for the variance of the depen-
Ownership type
dent variable (i.e., farmers' satisfaction with the Plant Clinics ser- Privately owned 395 80.8
vices and farmers' willingness to use the Plant Clinics services). Ten Rented 47 9.6
variables (named X1 to X10) were included as independent vari- Privately owned-rented 47 9.6
No response 5 1.0
ables in this analysis. These variables were: service relevance (X1),
service quality (X2), service usefulness (X3), customer service (X4), Familiarity with Plant Clinics
age (X5), education level (X6), farming experience (X7), income No familiarity 28 5.7
Low 97 19.8
(X8), farm size (X9), and familiarity with Plant Clinics services
Fair 219 44.7
(X10). In addition, logit regression was applied for identifying fac- High 109 22.2
tors affecting willingness to pay for the Plant Clinics services. Very high 37 7.6
No response 4 0.8

SD: standard deviation.

3. Results

A significant part of the respondents (31.2%) were in the age
range of 41e50 years and the mean age was 52.05 years, showing a
sample of experienced farmers with over 30 years of farming
experience (Table 1). Most respondents were male (88.8%). Farmers
had variable levels of education (Table 1). Some (8.1%) had aca-
demic degrees, but 17.1% were illiterate. Almost half of the farmers
(47.9%) owned less than 1 ha of land and the majority (80.8%)
owned land. A significant part of the respondents (44.7%) were
fairly familiar with Plant Clinics.
Seventeen items were included in the questionnaire to assess
rice farmers' willingness to use the services of Plant Clinics
(Table 2). Among these items, ‘perceived usefulness of Plant Clinics'
and ‘familiarity with the most modern pest control methods
through clinics' received the highest satisfaction rates (Table 2).
Negative opinions, such as ‘I think that the use of the Plant Clinics
services is a waste of money or time’, also received high rates.
Farmers' willingness to refer to Plant Clinics was estimated and
grouped by Eq. (1). Accordingly, respondents were categorized into
four groups given the mean willingness M ¼ 3.867 and standard
deviation SD ¼ 0.57. Results revealed that 53.7% of rice farmers had
good to high willingness to use the services of Plant Clinics
(Table 3).
Rice growers' satisfaction with the services provided by Plant
Clinics was assessed by four constructs: service relevance, service
quality, service usefulness, and customer services (Table 4). The
assessment was based on farmers who had used the Plant Clinics
services. The scores given by respondents to those constructs were
summed up and then the respondents were categorized according
to Eq. (1). Overall, mean score of satisfaction reflected high satis-
faction with Plant Clinics (Table 4). Also, among the constructs
forming satisfaction, ‘customer service’ had the highest rate.
The relationship of the research variables with the willingness
to use the service of Plant Clinics was examined using simple cor-
relation (Table 5). Service relevance, service quality, service use-
fulness, customer service, and familiarity with the Plant Clinics
services showed the highest positive correlation coefficients
(P < 0.01). Also, education level and farm size were directly and
significantly correlated to willingness to use the Plant Clinics ser-
vices (P < 0.01), whereas annual income showed a significant
relationship with willingness at P < 0.05 (r ¼ 0.112). By contrast, age
exhibited a negative relationship with willingness (P < 0.01)
(r ¼ 0.155). With reference to the correlation coefficients calcu-
lated, they showed a significant link between adoption and some of
the above variables, but they need to be interpreted discreetly,
since some they were low, but significant, because of the large
194 R. Ghiasi et al. / Crop Protection 98 (2017) 191e197

Table 2
Paddy farmers' willingness to use Plant Clinics.

Attitude n Meana SD

I feel that Plant Clinics are useful for farming communities. 493 4.23 0.798
I can find the newest methods of pest control with the help of Plant Clinics. 489 4.10 0.848
I think that the use of Plant Clinics services is a waste of money. 492 4.05 0.852
I think that the use of Plant Clinics services is a waste of time. 485 4.03 0.906
I easily consult with Plant Clinics experts about pest management. 494 4.02 0.859
The use of Plant Clinics services is very important for the development of agriculture. 490 4.01 0.866
I will continue to contact Plant Clinics. 486 3.97 0.879
I use new pest management under the consultation of Plant Clinics experts. 892 3.93 0.825
I am very careful in the application of Plant Clinics recommendations. 489 3.79 0.878
Plant Clinics services are not better than what we know and have learnt by ourselves about pest management. 492 3.78 0.890
I deeply believe that the use of Plant Clinics services will improve farming earning. 492 3.76 1.010
For me, Plant Clinics do not motivate farmers to change the current pest management practices. 488 3.75 0.886
It is impossible to get timely recommendations from Plant Clinics about farm problems. 489 3.75 0.953
It is difficult to adopt Plant Clinics recommendations. 484 3.68 0.895
Plant Clinics services consider my farm requirements well. 493 3.67 0.879
I have not benefited from Plant Clinics services, yet. 490 3.62 0.954
I have benefited from Plant Clinics services a lot. 491 3.60 0.880

SD: standard deviation.

a
On a scale from 1 ¼ very low to 5 ¼ very high.

Table 3 multicollinearity in regression analysis. As a rule of thumb, the

Grouping farmers based on willingness to use the Plant Clinics services. coefficients of greater than 0.8 among predictor variables would be
Willingness to use Plant Clinics services Frequency Percentage problematic (Field, 2009). All studied variables had correlation
coefficients of less than 0.8. So, they were suitable for regression
Poor (<3.297) 87 17.6
Fair (3.297e3.867) 142 28.7
analysis. According to the results of stepwise regression analysis,
Good (3.867e4.44) 189 38.3 the predictor variables were included in the regression equation in
Excellent (>4.44) 76 15.4 the order of their importance and role in accounting for the
Mean ¼ 3.867; SD ¼ 0.57. dependent variable in five steps. The most important variable

Table 4
Grouping farmers based on satisfaction by Plant Clinics service relevance, service quality, service usefulness, and customer service.

Category (%) Service relevance Service quality Service usefulness Customer service General satisfaction

Poor 16.4 16.2 18.7 16.4 16.5

Fair 41.9 28.7 30.2 29.3 32.1
Good 23.9 40.3 28.4 37.9 33.3
Excellent 17.8 14.8 22.7 16.4 18.1

Mean 4.01 3.96 3.92 4.10 3.99

SD 0.63 0.58 0.57 0.56 0.52

SD: standard deviation.

Table 5 included in the regression equation was ‘service relevance’ that

Correlation coefficients between farmers' attitude towards Plant Clinics and inde- could capture 57.7% of the variance of farmers' willingness to use
pendent variables.
the Plant Clinics services. As the variables of ‘service usefulness’,
Variable Correlation coefficient P-value ‘familiarity with the Plant Clinics services’, ‘service quality’, and
Service relevance (X1) 0.754** 0.000 ‘farmers' education level’ were added to the equation, the regres-
Service quality (X2) 0.723** 0.000 sion model captured 68.4% of the variance of the dependent vari-
Service usefulness (X3) 0.708** 0.000 able. The beta coefficient of ‘service relevance’ vs. those of other
Customer service (X4) 0.653** 0.000
variables pointed its higher share in predicting the reference vari-
Age (X5) 0.155** 0.001
Education level (X6) 0.220** 0.000 able. Also, tolerance and VIF were examined to check the presence
Farming experience (X7) 0.037 0.424 of multicollinearity. High tolerance (close to one) and low VIF re-
Income (X8) 0.112* 0.018 flected the lack of multicollinearity among the predictor variables.
Farm size (X9) 0.134** 0.003 The Durbin-Watson measure, whose optimum value is 1.5e2.5, was
Familiarity with Plant Clinics services (X10) 0.532** 0.000
used to check the independence of residuals from the regression
** Significant at P < 0.01; * significant at P < 0.05. analysis. It was found to be 1.5 for our regression analysis, showing
the independence of the residuals.
Farmers' willingness to pay for services offered by Plant Clinics
sample size. For this reason, interpretations were mainly based on
is shown in Table 7. The offer of contracts for producing safe
the results of the stepwise multiple regression model.
products and helping to sell them at the highest price received the
Variables showing a significant correlation were included in
highest rate. Also, the service of diagnosis of plant pests and dis-
regression analysis (Table 6). Also, the coefficients of correlation
eases by taking samples to the Plant Clinics received a high rate.
between the predictor variables were considered to avoid
 R. Ghiasi et al. / Crop Protection 98 (2017) 191e197 195

Table 6
Factors affecting farmers' willingness to use the Plant Clinics services.

Variable b SE b t P-value Tolerance VIF R2

Constant 0.435 0.121 3.59 0.000

Service relevance (X1) 0.360 0.040 0.391 8.79 0.000 0.389 2.57 0.577
Service usefulness (X3) 0.211 0.044 0.207 4.79 0.000 0.395 2.53 0.634
Familiarity (X10) 0.100 0.018 0.172 5.47 0.000 0.751 1.33 0.667
Service quality (X2) 0.189 0.048 0.187 3.94 0.000 0.328 3.05 0.678
Education level (X6) 0.036 0.013 0.077 2.75 0.006 0.952 1.05 0.684

SE: standard error; VIF: variance inflation factor.

Table 7
Farmers' willingness to pay for services offered by Plant Clinics.

Kind of service offered Low Fair High M

FQ % FQ % FQ %

Contracts for producing safe products and helping to sell them at the highest price 140 28.7 190 38.9 158 32.4 2.04
Diagnosis of plant pests and diseases by taking samples to the Plant Clinic 162 33.3 195 40.0 130 26.7 1.93
Making contract to ensure more production 180 37.2 180 37.2 124 25.6 1.88
Visit the orchard and provide the necessary guidance 192 39.6 212 43.7 81 16.7 1.77
Visit the rice fields and provide the necessary guidance from beginning to harvest time 197 40.5 214 43.9 76 15.6 1.75
Visit the nursery rice and provide the necessary guidance 200 41.2 212 43.6 74 15.2 1.74
Receiving prescription to get the chemical fertilizers 231 47.4 173 35.5 83 17.1 1.70
Visit the rice fields and provide the necessary guidance in the first two weeks after transplanting 246 50.5 174 35.7 67 13.8 1.63
Visiting market gardensa and providing the necessary guidance 235 48.2 198 40.7 54 11.1 1.63

FQ: frequency; M: mean.

a
Market garden: a relatively small-scale production of fruits, vegetables, and flowers as cash crops, frequently sold directly to consumers and restaurants.

Table 8 4. Discussion
Factors affecting farmers' willingness to pay for Plant Clinics services.

Variable b SE Wald P-value Exp(B) This study provides an evaluation of Plant Clinics function in
Guilan Province of Iran through farmers' satisfaction. As clearly
Constant 5.345 1.001 28.512 0.000 0.005
Service relevance 0.621 0.194 10.184 0.001 1.860 presented in Table 4, farmers were satisfied with Plant Clinics
Age 0.035 0.015 5.564 0.018 1.040 particularly with respect to customer service (i.e., the level of ser-
Farming experience 0.033 0.014 6.083 0.014 0.967 vices offered by the Plant Clinics personnel) which showed the
Land area 0.335 0.112 9.040 0.003 1.400
highest mean score (4.10) of satisfaction and then with respect to
Familiarity with Plant Clinics 0.510 0.125 16.613 0.000 1.660
service relevance (i.e., the relevance of Plant Clinics services with
2 Log likelihood ¼ 500.84, Nagelkerke R square ¼ 0.200, Cox & Snell R farmers' needs) which was ranked in the second place of satisfac-
square ¼ 0.15.
tion with a mean score 4.01. Using self-reported measures of
farmers' familiarity with Plant Clinics, willingness to use Plant
Clinics, and willingness to pay for services offered by Plant Clinics,
Factors affecting farmers' willingness to pay for services offered by the study grouped farmers according to the above variables. Most
Plant Clinics were explored with logistic regression (Table 8). In farmers of the current study had fair familiarity with Plant Clinics
logistic regression, the 2 log likelihood is used as a measure of the and were rather divided with respect to willingness to use the Plant
goodness of fit of the model. The model could predict 67.8% of the Clinics services. The most important factors explaining the variance
dependent variable values on the basis of the variables included in in farmers' willingness to use the Plant Clinics services were found
the equation (Table 9). The variables: ‘service relevance’, ‘age’, ‘land to be ‘service relevance’, ‘service usefulness’, ‘familiarity with Plant
area’, and ‘familiarity with Plant Clinics’ had a positive impact on Clinics services’, ‘service quality’, and ‘education level’ of the
farmers' willingness to pay. However, ‘farming experience’ had a farmers. These factors contributed positively to farmers' willing-
negative impact on farmers' willingness to pay. Exp(B) odds ratio ness to use the Plant Clinics services. Farmers' opinion about the
revealed that among variables included in the regression equation, quality of Plant Clinics, linked to costebenefit analyses of the clinic
‘service relevance’ and ‘familiarity with Plant Clinics’ had the advice, is a major aspect of Plant Clinics evaluation (Danielsen and
largest contribution in predicting the willingness to pay, so that as Kelly, 2010). Research regarding farmers' familiarity and willing-
these variables are improved, the likelihood of willingness to pay is ness to use Plant Clinics does not exist in the literature. Thus, the
increased by 1.860 and 1.660 times, respectively. results of the study provide a benchmark for future comparisons in
the area or other areas with similar farmers' profile. The findings
could be useful indicators to policy makers in shaping and rec-
Table 9 ommending future policies in Iran. For example, the results can
Segmentation of farmers according to willingness to pay (WP) for Plant Clinics serve as a guideline for the clinic owners to seek approaches to
services in terms of logistic regression. improve the productivity in their respective clinics and to gain a
WP better perspective of farmers' needs so that they can provide more
I will not pay I will pay Percentage appropriate and useful services.
According to the results of this study, ‘service relevance’ and
WP I will not pay 124 72 63.3
I will pay 60 154 72.0
‘service usefulness’ were the most important factors affecting rice
farmers' willingness to use the Plant Clinics services. ‘Service
Overall percentage 67.8%.
196 R. Ghiasi et al. / Crop Protection 98 (2017) 191e197
relevance’ refers to how relevant is the project's approach and the
activities implemented in responding to the needs of smallholder
farmers (Saravanan et al., 2009). Many of the Plant Clinics aim to
bring services closer to farmers, but they do not explicitly focus on
the suitability and relevance of the advice for different groups of
farmers (Bentley et al., 2011). Yet, the relevance and the usefulness
of the Plant Clinics advice are also a key to the acceptance of the
system. Advice needs to be adapted to the context and to the user.
The local adaptations made by Plant Clinics mostly address the
reach of advice, but they can also contribute to the relevance and
quality of the advice, providing responsiveness to farmers' needs. In
particular, after the prevalence of agrochemicals, the environ-
mental pollution and the adverse impacts on human health grad-
ually came to focus. Since experts in Plant Clinics can give advice
about the latest pest control methods and technologies with the
least environmental impact using updated data, they gain impor-
tance in securing farmers' health and produce. Furthermore, rec-
ommendations to use modern pest management practices can
reduce the costs of pest management, leading to the production of
healthier products and ensuring more economic benefits for
farmers. Farmers in Bolivia who followed the Plant Clinics recom-
mendations tended to spend less on pesticides (Bentley et al., 2011).
Education level was detected as an effective factor of farmer's
willingness to use the Plant Clinics services. The level of farmers'
education is expected to have a positive influence on farmers' de-
cision to adopt a new technology or participate in an innovation
process. Previous research from Nepal (Adhikari et al., 2016)
showed that farmers with higher levels of education tended to
participate in Plant Clinics, probably because education pushes
farmers to acquire more knowledge and information to make their
farm enterprise better. Farmers' education level usually plays an
important role as it widens farmers' vision and exposes them to
potentially unknown aspects of agriculture related to the envi-
ronment and the sustainability of farming, such as opportunities to
promote pesticide use within a frame of environmental steward-
ship (Shetty et al., 2010). In Bolivia, a modest increase in pesticides
helped improve the quality and quantity of the harvest of certain
crops, like potato, citrus, and peach palm (Bentley et al., 2011).
The results of the present study showed that farmers' familiarity
with the Plant Clinics services plays a considerable role in their
willingness to use them. Since Plant Clinics were established in
recent decades, their spatial distribution across the province is not
well-balanced so that remote farmers may have less access to and
familiarity with their services. So, farmers' familiarity with the
Plant Clinics services may be low in different parts of the province
and even some farmers can be totally ignorant. Previous research
from Nepal reported a negative influence of distance on farmers'
decision to participate in Plant Clinics (Adhikari et al., 2016). Plant
Clinics should make it a priority to assess the reasons of the fair
familiarity of farmers with offered services during the present
evaluation to take remedial action. This could be done by con-
ducting surveys in a radius around the venues of the Plant Clinics,
with farmers not having visited the Plant Clinics being asked to give
the reasons for not doing so. Evidently, farmers' familiarity with the
Plant Clinics services should be promoted along with improving the
Plant Clinics services, such as delivering detailed diagnoses and
recommendations to smallholder farmers, equipping mobile Plant
Clinics in remote districts of the province to act as drop-in infor-
mation centers for smallholder farmers, and publicizing Plant
Clinics and information on crop pests and diseases into local lan-
guages through brochures and leaflets. The number of farmers
reached by the Plant Clinics can also be increased by advocacy with
farmers’ groups to send a representative rather than have each
farmer come to the clinic on his or her own account. Likewise Plant
Clinics experts should systematically request farmers to share
information with other farmers.
Farmers of the current study were found willing to pay for
signing contracts that will help them to produce safe commodities
and sell them at high prices. Since farmers' livelihood is secured by
their agricultural produce and any damage to the produce will
adversely affect their economic livelihood, they look for the most
relevant services to deal with potential risks. The climate of Guilan
Province is particularly apt for the growth and development of
pests and plant diseases. Rice stem borer and blast are among pests
and diseases that can cause significant damage to the rice crop
every year. Forecasts and timely management of these damaging
agents are of a high priority for rice growers in Guilan Province. The
experts in Plant Clinics use different forecasting practices, including
pest traps, to give advice to farmers about the suitable management
practice (cultural control, mechanical control, biological control,
and chemical control). Also, in case of the need for chemical control,
they can recommend appropriate pesticides. Several studies on
Plant Clinics have found positive trends in increased crop produc-
tion and income earned (Bentley et al., 2011). However, attributing
these key changes to Plant Clinics alone is difficult. The variables
‘service relevance’, ‘age’, ‘farming experience’, ‘land area’, and ‘fa-
miliarity with Plant Clinics’ had a significant impact on farmers'
willingness to pay for the Plant Clinics services. However, farming
experience had a negative impact on farmers' willingness to pay.
These findings are not surprising, given that the old farmers may be
less educated and thus find the Plant Clinics services highly useful,
the large farmers may see a great benefit from the Plant Clinics
services due to the large land area under cultivation, whereas the
experienced farmers may feel that Plant Clinics services are not
absolutely necessary. However, these issues require further study.
The introduction of plant health clinics can serve as a vehicle to
strengthen the plant health system, making plant health services
available, accessible, relevant, and effective (Mur et al., 2015). Plant
Clinics are suited to all agricultural systems and address consistent
demands by farmers for timely advice (Boa et al., 2016). The biggest
gains are often seen where existing rural advisory services are
weakest. Therefore, Plant Clinics are suited to farming communities
that are often ignored or that fail to receive public extension sup-
port. They can be operated by many different types of organization
and they are flexible and adaptable to local conditions (Boa et al.,
2016). Plant Clinics help to bridge gaps between extension and
research and strengthen collective responses to plant health threats
and risks. Networking maximizes the impact in the face of
shrinking government investments in agriculture and diminishing
human resource capacity in diagnostics and applied pathology
(Miller et al., 2009). However, it should be kept in mind that the
process of performing effective plant clinic services requires local
adaptation to make the best of scarce resources, reach as many
people as possible, and create synergies with other activities (Mur
et al., 2015).
5. Conclusions
The results presented here are a first attempt to quantify
farmers' familiarity, willingness to use, and willingness to pay for
services offered by Plant Clinics in Guilan Province of Iran. Most
farmers had fair familiarity with Plant Clinics and were rather
divided with respect to willingness to use the Plant Clinics services.
Farmers evaluated ‘customer service’ and ‘service relevance’ of
Plant Clinics with the highest satisfaction rates. Such analyses will
help define the scope of the Plant Clinics, delimit the Plant Clinics
‘jurisdiction’, create realistic expectations as to what Plant Clinics
experts can do themselves, and identify straightforward measures
to improve, for example, skills and knowledge of Plant Clinics staff
and technical support and advice. Overall, Plant Clinics are well
 R. Ghiasi et al. / Crop Protection 98 (2017) 191e197
suited to support decision-making on technical, operational, and
strategic matters in the study area, but our data suggest weaknesses
in dissemination (some farmers were less familiar with Plant
Clinics) that need addressing in project design and implementation.
Farmers' familiarity with the Plant Clinics services should be pro-
moted along with improving the Plant Clinics services. In addition,
regular and systematic analysis of Plant Clinics should be part of the
standard operations for evaluation.
Acknowledgement
Financial support by Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University
Grant No. 4.5830 is acknowledged.
References
Abbasi, E., Sarami Froushani, M., Farhadian, H., Norozi, A., 2015. Farmers' satisfaction
regarding agricultural consulting, technical and engineering services corpora-
tions in Markazi Province. Iran. J. Agric. Econ. Dev. Res. 46, 285e297 (in Persian
with English abstract).
Abdollahzadeh, G., Sharifzadeh, M.S., Damalas, C.A., 2016. Motivations for adopting
biological control among Iranian rice farmers. Crop Prot. 80, 42e50.
Adhikari, R., Regmi, P.P., Thapa, R.B., Dhoj, Y.G.C., Boa, E., 2016. Determinants of
farmers' participation in plant health clinics in Nepal. Nepal. J. Agric. Sci. 9,
290e299.
Allahyari, M.S., 2012. Sustainable Agricultural Extension System. IAU Press, Rasht,
Iran.
Allahyari, M.S., Chizari, M., Mirdamadi, S.M., 2009. Extension-education methods to
facilitate learning in sustainable agriculture. J. Agric. Soc. Sci. 5, 27e30.
Allahyari, M.S., Damalas, C.A., Ebadattalab, M., 2016. Adoption of integrated pest
management for olive fruit fly (Bactrocera oleae) in Roudbar County, Iran. Crop
Prot. 84, 113e120.
Bartlett, J.E., Kotrilk, J.W., Higgins, C.C., 2001. Organizational research: determining
appropriate sample size in survey research. Inf. Technol. Learn. Perform. J. 19,
43e50.
Bentley, J., Boa, E., Almendras, F., Franco, P., Antezana, O., Díaz, O., Franco, J.,
Villarroel, J., 2011. How farmers benefit from plant clinics: an impact study in
Bolivia. Int. J. Agric. Sustain 9, 393e408.
Boa, E., 2010. Plant healthcare for poor farmers around the world: gathering de-
mand and innovative responses. In: Hardwick, N., Lodovica Gullino, M. (Eds.),
Knowledge and Technology Transfer for Plant Pathology. Springer, Netherlands,
pp. 1e16.
Boa, E., Franco, J., Chaudhury, M., Simbalaya, P., Van Der Linde, E., 2016. Plant Health
Clinics. Note 23, Global Forum for Rural Advisory Services (GFRAS). Good
Practice Notes for Extension and Advisory Services. GFRAS, Lausanne,
Switzerland.
Campbell, C.L., Peterson, P.D., Griffith, C.S., 1999. The Formative Years of Plant Pa-
thology in the United States. American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, MN,
197
USA, p. 427.
Damalas, C.A., 2009. Understanding benefits and risks of pesticide use. Sci. Res.
Essays 4, 945e949.
Damalas, C.A., 2016. Safe food production with minimum and judicious use of
pesticides. In: Selamat, J., Iqbal, S.Z. (Eds.), Food Safety. Springer International
Publishing, Switzerland, pp. 43e55.
Damalas, C.A., Eleftherohorinos, I.G., 2011. Pesticide exposure, safety issues, and risk
assessment indicators. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 8, 1402e1419.
Danielsen, S., Kelly, P., 2010. A novel approach to quality assessment of plant health
clinics. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 8, 257e269.
Danielsen, S., Matsiko, F.B., 2016. Using a plant health system framework to assess
plant clinic performance in Uganda. Food Sec. 8, 345e359.
Danielsen, S., Boa, E., Mafabi, M., Mutebi, E., Reeder, R., Kabeere, F., Karyeija, R., 2013.
Using plant clinic registers to assess the quality of diagnoses and advice given to
farmers: a case study from Uganda. J. Agric. Educ. Ext. 19, 183e201.
Field, A., 2009. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS, third ed. Sage Publications, Lon-
don, UK, p. 856.
Khan, M., Damalas, C.A., 2015. Factors preventing the adoption of alternatives to
chemical pest control among Pakistani cotton farmers. Int. J. Pest Manag. 61,
9e16.
Miller, S.A., Beed, F.D., Harmon, C.L., 2009. Plant disease diagnostic capabilities and
networks. Ann. Rev. Phytopathol. 47, 15e38.
Moazen, Z., Movahed Mohammadi, H., Rezvanfar, A., Pouratashi, M., 2013. A study
on administrators' job performance of agricultural secondary education centers
in Tehran Province, from the viewpoint of teachers. Iran. J. Agric. Econ. Dev. Res.
44, 211e220 (in Persian with English abstract).
Mousanejad, S., Alizadeh, A., Safaie, N., 2010. Assessment of yield loss due to rice
blast disease in Iran. J. Agr. Sci. Technol. 12, 357e364.
Mur, R., Williams, F., Danielsen, S., Audet-Be langer, G., Mulema, J., 2015. Listening to
the Silent Patient: Uganda's Journey towards Institutionalizing Inclusive Plant
Health Services. CABI Working Paper 7. CABI, Nairobi, Kenya.
Noorhosseini, S.A., Allahyari, M.S., Sabouri, M.S., 2010. Factors influencing the
adoption of biological control of rice stem borer (Chilo suppressalis) in Talesh
Region, Iran. Int. J. Agric. Sci. Res. 1, 49e57.
Razzaghi Borkhani, F., Rezvanfar, A., Shabanali Fami, H., Pouratashi, M., 2013. Social
factors influencing adoption of integrated pest management (IPM) technologies
by paddy farmers. Int. J. Agric. Manag. Dev. 3, 211e218.
Ranjbar, M., Samadani, B., Rahimian, H., Jahansuz, M., Bihamta, M., 2007. Effect of
winter planting of cover crop on weeds control and tomato yield. Pajouhesh
Sazandegi 74, 24e33 (in Persian).
Rivera, W., Gary, A., 2000. Contracting for agricultural extension. J. Public Admin.
Dev. 16, 151e161.
Saravanan, R., Veerabhadraiah, V., Shiravalinge Gowda, V.S., 2009. Indicators and
index to measure public and private agricultural extension organizational
effectiveness. Mysore J. Agric. Sci. 43, 132e137.
Shetty, P.K., Murugan, M., Hiremath, M.B., Sreeja, K.G., 2010. Farmers' education and
perception on pesticide use and crop economies in Indian agriculture. J. Exp.
Sci. 1, 3e8.
Sulaiman, R.V., Sadamate, V.V., 2000. Privatizing Farm Extension in India. Policy
Paper 10. National Center for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research, New
Delhi, India.