Who Hears the Forecast? Community Radio Leaves Women and Big Households Behind in Ghana

In the drought-prone farmlands of Northern Ghana, where a failed rainy season can wipe out a family’s maize or rice harvest, the difference between resilience and ruin often comes down to one thing: information. A new study of 1,200 smallholder farmers across the country’s five northern regions reveals that community radio, long celebrated as the great equalizer of rural communication, is not reaching everyone equally. Women, farmers from large households, and the poorest growers are systematically excluded from the climate knowledge that could save their crops, according to research published in Discover Agriculture.

The research team, led by Enoch Kwame Tham-Agyekum of Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology and the University of Pretoria, set out to answer a deceptively simple question: who actually gets access to climate information broadcast over community radio, and who is left out? Rather than treating access as a yes-or-no matter of owning a radio, the researchers conceptualized it as a four-dimensional construct spanning physical, socio-cultural, economic, and institutional or policy-related accessibility. This framework allowed them to disentangle the many ways a farmer can be cut off from the airwaves, from missing batteries and bad roads to gender norms that keep women away from listening groups.

The scale of the study is notable. Working from an estimated population of roughly 870,000 smallholder farmers across the Northern, Upper East, Upper West, Savannah, and North East regions, the team surveyed 1,200 farmers, more than three times the minimum sample size required for statistical reliability at a 95 percent confidence level. Respondents were selected through multi-stage sampling, with regions, radio stations, and communities chosen purposively for their climate vulnerability and active broadcasting, and individual farmers drawn randomly in proportion to each region’s farming population. The survey data were then complemented by interviews with 25 key informants, including agricultural extension agents, religious and traditional leaders, community leaders, and NGO representatives.

What the researchers found first was how deeply community radio is woven into daily agricultural life. More than 58 percent of farmers reported listening to climate-related broadcasts every day, and another 24.5 percent tuned in weekly. Only about 6 percent never listened at all. Most farmers used their own radio sets, at 44.25 percent, or mobile phones, at 37.83 percent, while roughly one in five relied on neighbors’ radios or communal listening groups. The interviews revealed that these shared devices matter enormously in remote areas, where farmers gather to hear a forecast and immediately discuss what it means for planting dates.

The content itself proved far richer than simple weather reports. Key informants described broadcasts covering seasonal forecasts, rainfall warnings, planting-date guidance, crop diversification, drought-resistant seed varieties, soil management, post-harvest storage, livestock care during dry spells, and even market prices during drought. The authors characterize community radio as an integrated climate information system, one that combines early warning, advisory services, indigenous knowledge such as traditional signs of changing weather, and market intelligence across the entire agricultural value chain. In a region where formal extension services are often understaffed and unable to reach remote communities, this makes radio a lifeline for climate-smart decision-making.

But the study’s most striking findings concern the patterns of exclusion hiding inside those impressive listenership numbers. Using a Multivariate Probit model, which allowed the researchers to estimate the four access dimensions simultaneously while accounting for correlations among them, the team identified clear socio-economic fault lines. Gender emerged as a powerful determinant: being female was associated with significantly lower physical, economic, and institutional accessibility, with the physical dimension significant at the p < 0.01 level and the economic and institutional dimensions at p < 0.05. The authors attribute this to mobility constraints, domestic responsibilities, and lower device ownership among women, citing comparative evidence from Benin where 67 percent of women rice processors owned a radio set compared with 87 percent of men.

Household size told a similar story. Farmers from larger households, which in this sample averaged about nine members, experienced significantly lower physical, economic, and institutional accessibility, all at p < 0.01. The explanation is partly economic: a single radio set shared among many family members limits individual access, and the time and resource pressures of feeding a large household squeeze out the costs of batteries, charging, and participation in information networks. Extension access, by contrast, was the strongest positive predictor, significantly boosting physical, economic, and institutional accessibility, confirming that farmers already connected to agricultural extension agents are far more likely to benefit from radio-linked institutional programming. Higher monthly income also improved accessibility across three dimensions.

One result defied expectations: access to formal credit was negatively associated with all four dimensions of accessibility at p < 0.01. The researchers offer several plausible explanations rather than a definitive one. Farmers with credit may rely on alternative, more personalized information channels such as extension personnel, input suppliers, or mobile-based services, making community radio relatively less important to them. Credit obligations may also reshape how farmers allocate their time, pulling them away from community-based information channels. Whatever the mechanism, the finding underscores that financial resources alone do not guarantee engagement with agricultural knowledge systems, particularly where coordination between financial institutions and extension services remains weak.

The perception indices added texture to the statistical picture. Physical accessibility scored highest in farmers’ estimations at 3.69 on a five-point scale, with station locations and broadcast schedules well aligned to farming routines, though rainy-season roads and patchy signals in interior communities posed real problems. Institutional and policy accessibility followed at 3.75, buoyed by strong collaboration between extension agents and radio stations, which scored 4.31, but dragged down by weak NGO support and inconsistent alignment with government agricultural policy. Socio-cultural accessibility scored 3.60, with farmers praising local-language broadcasts that make complex forecasts understandable, yet noting that chiefs and elders, the community’s most trusted voices, are too rarely involved on air. Economic accessibility was the weakest dimension at 3.50, with informants reporting that even small costs become prohibitive during the lean season and that some households lack reliable radios or batteries altogether.

The study’s recommendations are as concrete as its diagnosis. The authors call for gender-responsive listening groups supported with solar-powered radios for women, broadcast schedules aligned with women’s domestic and farming responsibilities, and formal integration of traditional leaders into climate programming to build trust and message acceptance. They propose targeted subsidies or cost-sharing schemes to boost radio ownership among credit-constrained and large-household farmers, multi-stakeholder content committees to improve the technical depth and policy alignment of broadcasts, and integration of radio with mobile-phone services such as SMS alerts and call-in platforms. Each proposal comes with honest caveats about funding sustainability, network coverage, and digital literacy gaps. The broader lesson reaches beyond Ghana: as climate change intensifies pressure on rain-fed agriculture across the Sahel and beyond, the channels that deliver life-saving forecasts are only as effective as their weakest link, and ensuring that women, the poor, and the marginalized can actually hear the message may matter as much as the accuracy of the forecast itself.

Subject of Research: Inclusion and exclusion in climate information access through community radio among smallholder farmers in Northern Ghana

Article Title: Patterns of inclusion and exclusion in climate information access through community radio among smallholder farmers in Northern Ghana

Article References: Tham-Agyekum, E. K., Nimoh, F., Assani, A. S., Maramura, T. C., Cheboi, J. J., Wainaina, R. W., & Bakang, J.-E. A. (2026). Patterns of inclusion and exclusion in climate information access through community radio among smallholder farmers in Northern Ghana. Discover Agriculture, 4(1), Article 310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44279-026-00792-0

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s44279-026-00792-0

Keywords: community radio, climate information, smallholder farmers, Northern Ghana, climate adaptation, gender inequality, agricultural extension, information accessibility, rain-fed agriculture, climate resilience, mobile phones, rural communication