Understanding the Misinformation Paradox: How Do False Agricultural Narratives Shape Farmer Decisions in Ghana's Planting for Food and Jobs Policy?

This study introduces the concept of Agricultural Policy Misinformation (APM) and examines its influence on sustainable practice adoption under Ghana’s Planting for Food and Jobs (PFJ) policy. Building on Chowdhury et al. (2023), who highlighted the disruptive role of misinformation in agri-food systems, the study integrates the Social Amplification of Risk Framework, Information Deficit Model, and Framing Theory to explore how APM affects farmers’ decision-making. A cross-sectional mixed-methods approach was used, involving 107 participants (99 survey respondents and 8 key informants) across Ghana’s forest and savannah zones. Quantitative analysis employed descriptive statistics, probit regression, and Principal Component Analysis to construct an APM index based on four indicators: beliefs about PFJ as political reward, GMO seed concerns, doubts about input quality, and subsidy authenticity. Qualitative data were analyzed thematically. The results show prevalent misinformation related to input quality (36.3%), GMOs (28.5%), and political bias (17.6%). Political actors, social media, peers, and farmers were key sources of misinformation, while extension agents were most trusted. A notable finding is that misinformation decreased fertilizer adoption but increased seed adoption, revealing a paradox in behavioral response. This study contributes to agricultural policy literature by defining and empirically testing APM. It recommends strengthening transparent communication, utilizing trusted extension services, and implementing input-specific outreach strategies. Participatory training approaches are encouraged to build trust and resilience against misinformation. The findings emphasize the need for tailored communication frameworks to enhance policy impact and support sustainable agriculture in Ghana.