Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
In accordance with the researcher Jambor and Babu (2016) now (TheComprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Program) “CAADP” is in its 10thyear. It has carried the significance of agriculture to the area’s economic alterationback to the front. The researcher Hanson and Leautier (2013) stated that it as well asindicates to an innovative method to the mode in which Gabon is shaping itsforthcoming, with the choices of investment and development made by Gabon’soffering the frame work for contributions from their allies and investment choices.
According to Balié, Del Prete, Magrini, Montalbano, and Nenci (2017) theagricultural program of (TAU-NEPAD) has offered numerous advantages such as itreinforced the process of democratic through making the involvement of all stakeholders, containing agriculturalists or farmers. According to Jambor and Babu (2016)the state authority of Gabon stated that agriculture is a business of everybody. Theindependence of state relies on its development as it facilitates the state of Gabon toescape the menace of food uncertainty, which actually weakens their dominance andnurtures agitation; it is a major driver of development and progress whose influence isrecognized by number of politicians and economists. The area provides an extremepotential for inequity and scarcity lessening because it offers bases of productivity oroutput from which the most deprived or needy persons working in the area shouldadvantage. The researcher Calzadilla, Zhu, Rehdanz, Tol, and Ringler (2014)mentioned that the authority of Gabon stated that farmers are the main protectors oftheir ecological assets and natural heritage, and the state tries to provide severalopportunities to build on and preserve those resources and assets.
1.2. Problem statement
Cooperative relations might probably be included positively in the way of“Agricultural Manufacturing” along with earnings. For example, Sanchez (2012)proposed, “green revolution varieties could have been more successful in Africa ifthey had been adopted together with improved soil management practices. While thisis plausible, there is little concrete evidence about synergistic relationships insmallholder environments”. It is primarily as a result of the reality that accessibleinfluence investigations first and foremost pay attention on solitary technologiesotherwise contrasting impacts of comparable sorts of technologies. For example,current researches have evaluated “productivity and income effects of improved seeds,sometimes in combination with chemical inputs” (Awotide et al., 2016; Kassie,Teklewold, Marenya, et al., 2015; Kelebe et al., 2017; Koppmair et al., 2017). Furtherinvestigations have seen at “the impact of organic manure, conservation agriculture,and related soil and water management practices” (Diiro & Sam, 2015; Eriksson et al.,2017; Guerry et al., 2015; Khonje et al., 2015).
A small number of current researches have initiated to capture an extensive strategy,evaluating “the impact of selected technology combinations in Zambia, Malawi, andEthiopia” (Amare & Shiferaw, 2017; Kabunga et al., 2014; Kassie, Teklewold, Marenya,et al., 2015). It is an up-and-coming as well as significant part of study. Furtherverification from a variety of backgrounds is required, with the purpose of directingupcoming agricultural technology approaches. This study will take part to this studyby means of “representative survey data from maize farmers in Gabon”. Above all,this study will investigate as well as see the effect of various kinds of technologies forexample “improved seeds, chemical fertilizers, organic manure, zero tillage, and cropresidue management as well as various technology combinations on farm householdincome”. Household in