Concepts and practices in agricultural extension in developing ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

production, processing and consumption) and the use of new knowledge of socioeconomic significanceand the institutional context that governs the way their interactions and processes take place.The National Innovation systems incorporate actors, processes as well as products. The different actorsinvolved include:• traditional sources of innovation (ITK)• modern actors (NARIs, IARCs)• private sector including agro-industrial firms and entrepreneurs (local, national and multinational)• civil society organizations (NGOs, farmers and consumer organizations, pressure groups)• those institutions that affect the process by which innovations are developed and delivered (laws,regulations, customs, norms).All of these innovation systems belong to a ‘soft’ system. 3The innovation systems perspective leads to the synthesis/triangular (supply and demand) model forcommercialization of knowledge as shown in Figure 1.4.Research(basic and applied,natural and social,molecular and systems,public and private)Extension/outreach(national, regional,local,NGOs, commercialgroups,commodity groups)End users(farmers, processors,agribusiness, policymakers,consumers groups,scientific disciplines)Source: Adapted and modified from Lacy (2001).Figure 1.4. The synthesis/triangular model for commercialization of knowledge.Partnership and networking for innovationPartnership and networks can improve the development and delivery of innovations that directly affectthe livelihoods of resource-poor or vulnerable households if structured appropriately. Challenges oftoday’s complex society are such that individual agencies and programs cannot succeed in deliveringresults on their own any longer. A collaborative effort that reaches across agencies, across levels ofgovernment, and across the public, nonprofit and private sectors is needed to achieve results. The keytools for doing this are partnerships and networks. Communities are built on connections and betterconnections create economic opportunity (Krebs and Holley 2002).Several recent studies illustrate the need for partnerships and networks to support the development anddelivery of agricultural innovation. Studies of agro-industrial firms and agro industrial opportunities in theregion for instance, suggests that there is high demand for technologies to enhance the quality of valueaddedagricultural processing, for new marketable products, and for institutional and infrastructural3. A ‘soft’ system is an analytical construct/concept that we use to describe a loose conglomerate of different agencies thatperform a similar task or work towards a common goal. It is not a real entity and does not physically exist.17
improvement to enhance supply chain efficiency (Hall and Yoganand 2002; Chema et al. 2003). Tomeet these demands, the studies recommended further investment in partnerships and networks toimprove strategic, managerial and institutional capacity in the agricultural sector (ASARECA 2003).Networking is a process by which two or more organizations and/or individuals collaborate to achievecommon goals (Waring 1997). Theoretically a network consists of two things: nodes and links betweenthose nodes. In social network analysis, the nodes of concern are people, groups and organizationsand the links may be social contacts, exchanges of information, political influence, money, jointmembership in an organization, joint participation in specific events or many other aspects of humanrelationships (Davies et al. 2003).Partnership is an alliance in which different individuals, groups, or organizations agree to a commongoal, work together, share resources, share the risks as well as the benefits, review the relationshipregularly, and revise their agreement as necessary.Networks potentially offer opportunities for taking advantage of economies of scale and scope as wellas for developing capabilities necessary to respond to old challenges of underdevelopment and newchallenges of climatic change, civil strife, diseases such as HIV/AIDS and other crises. Networks aim toexploit comparative advantage and maximize spillover effects.The primary objectives of networks are:• to jointly address complex issues that cannot be effectively addressed by any one partner/institution• to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of resource use and• to avoid duplication of efforts, exploit complementarities and synergies.Networks and networking continue to serve as a means of sharing information for competitive andcooperative reasons among organizations and individuals with common interests. According toCreech and Willard (2001), there has been a surge of experimentation with network models to fasttracksustainable development in the last 10 years with emergence of information and communicationtechnology being a significant driver.Networking is a means of giving greater regional, national or international impacts to the activitiesof community-based organizations. There is evidence to suggest that partnerships and networks areplaying an increasingly important role in addressing global issues such as health, environment, financeand governance (World Bank 2002). In the international agricultural R&D community, there is asimilar interest in promoting greater collaboration among diverse actors in the sector, including keyinternational organizations (CGIAR 1998; GFAR 2003), leading agricultural research firms (Barry andHorsch 2000; Richer and Simon 2000; Shear 2000) and non-governmental organizations engaged inagricultural science and technology (James 1996).Different studies indicate that it is worth investing in networking of different actors in society becausetheir contribution to learning and innovation for sustainable development is tremendous. Moreover,weak linkages among research, education and extension institutions result in systematic bottlenecks innational agricultural technology systems and limit their effectiveness to contribute to development (vanCrowder et al. 1997). As increasing number of players enter the field, it is evident that a synergy wouldbe created by working in partnership (Biggs 1989).18
Page 1 and 2: www.ipms-ethiopia.orgConcepts and p
Page 3 and 4: Authors’ affiliationsAnandajayase
Page 5 and 6: 5.5 Actor analysis 1895.6 Participa
Page 7 and 8: PrefaceThis source book is a produc
Page 9 and 10: civil society, farmer organizations
Page 11 and 12: Table 1.1. Key features of paradigm
Page 13 and 14: farmers analyse, choose, experiment
Page 15 and 16: experimentations are conducted with
Page 17 and 18: Steps/participants Objectives Activ
Page 19 and 20: Action research not only enables th
Page 21 and 22: 3. From research findings to tentat
Page 23: that governs the way these interact
Page 27 and 28: often managing a ‘portfolio’ of
Page 29 and 30: Figure 1.7. An example from the fur
Page 31 and 32: go for each value—with added comp
Page 33 and 34: 1.3.10 Positive devianceThis is a n
Page 35 and 36: Hall A and Nahdy S. 1999. New metho
Page 37 and 38: 2 The past, present and future of e
Page 39 and 40: they were geared to production and
Page 41 and 42: the basic premise of T&V was traini
Page 43 and 44: some reforms, especially in Latin A
Page 45 and 46: Complexity: Involves the diverse so
Page 47 and 48: is further aggravated by difficulti
Page 49 and 50: - Decentralization is the transfer
Page 51 and 52: • In situations where farming is
Page 53 and 54: • Coupons to agricultural bank lo
Page 55 and 56: Privatization has been attempted by
Page 57 and 58: Thus, inter-connectivity is closely
Page 59 and 60: departments, foreign and local data
Page 61 and 62: information on agricultural practic
Page 63 and 64: among field professionals. Similar
Page 65 and 66: • Linkages and support—resource
Page 67 and 68: Outside interventions normally inte
Page 69 and 70: In many cases potential partners al
Page 71 and 72: towards sustainability, extension i
Page 73 and 74: • Taking some risks by including
Page 75 and 76:
communities understand their person
Page 77 and 78:
intensive organization, which is in
Page 79 and 80:
In addition, the competitive intere
Page 81 and 82:
• The extension service’s oppor
Page 83 and 84:
Ameur C. 1994. Agricultural extensi
Page 85 and 86:
Mulhall A and Garforth C. 2000. Equ
Page 87 and 88:
Zijp W. 1998. Extension: Empowermen
Page 89 and 90:
MethodsMethods refer to the techniq
Page 91 and 92:
extension agent responsible for dif
Page 93 and 94:
deprived and the excluded in terms
Page 95 and 96:
the community’s own facilitators.
Page 97 and 98:
underestimation of the great comple
Page 99 and 100:
International development agenciesa
Page 101 and 102:
• The performance of researchers'
Page 103 and 104:
3.3.3 Commodity extension modelThis
Page 105 and 106:
3.3.5 NGO (international and local)
Page 107 and 108:
public demand for change, many indi
Page 109 and 110:
Usually decisions have to be made c
Page 111 and 112:
• The most important factor is th
Page 113 and 114:
Bennet C. 1990. Cooperative extensi
Page 115 and 116:
4 Group formation and management fo
Page 117 and 118:
• Farmer or producer organization
Page 119 and 120:
• Research induced FRGs potential
Page 121 and 122:
• Other activities that are not d
Page 123 and 124:
a group does not guarantee equal ac
Page 125 and 126:
4.4.3 Groups as individual enhancem
Page 127 and 128:
that FGs can be effective mechanism
Page 129 and 130:
Experience in Tanzania revealed adv
Page 131 and 132:
organizations are registered under
Page 133 and 134:
of groups is a process that both gr
Page 135 and 136:
• set SMART objectives to fulfill
Page 137 and 138:
Table 4.1. Stages in the group deve
Page 139 and 140:
Stage Purpose Behavioural patterns
Page 141 and 142:
2. Formulation of group goals and o
Page 143 and 144:
positions, members need to understa
Page 145 and 146:
It is very important that all those
Page 147 and 148:
Leadership style Characteristics of
Page 149 and 150:
In discussing bad leadership with g
Page 151 and 152:
iv. Withdrawing: acting bored and i
Page 153 and 154:
• be a good listener and monitor
Page 155 and 156:
A template for work plan is provide
Page 157 and 158:
Logical Framework (Project Planning
Page 159 and 160:
All groups want to succeed in their
Page 161 and 162:
MotivationMotivation can simply be
Page 163 and 164:
eflections on the life of the group
Page 165 and 166:
At point A both conflict and perfor
Page 167 and 168:
List all problem areas• Prioritiz
Page 169 and 170:
2. Mapping of group structureOne vi
Page 171 and 172:
Asgelil D and Tekalign M. 2001. Cli
Page 173 and 174:
Rural Development Committee monogra
Page 175 and 176:
Participatory Learning and Action (
Page 177 and 178:
Box 5.1. Tools and techniques used
Page 179 and 180:
5.2.3 Formal/verification surveyAlt
Page 181 and 182:
3. Define and understand the local
Page 183 and 184:
problems and opportunities. A trans
Page 185 and 186:
5.2.11 Venn diagram/’chapati’ d
Page 187 and 188:
This may also yield valuable inform
Page 189 and 190:
Key questions on benefits• What b
Page 191 and 192:
Table 5.5. Format for the Stakehold
Page 193 and 194:
Co-operativeFarmerResearchExtension
Page 195 and 196:
5.5.3 Actor determinant diagramThis
Page 197 and 198:
NAR S to developc apac ity in P R A
Page 199 and 200:
The tools discussed in this section
Page 201 and 202:
• Specify what, when, who, how et
Page 203 and 204:
eflection;• Action: the process a
Page 205 and 206:
2. Ranking. A method of ranking can
Page 207 and 208:
are out of the control of farmers m
Page 209 and 210:
Figure 5.19. Example of participato
Page 211 and 212:
Figure 5.21. Example of a resource
Page 213 and 214:
5.9.2 Implementing PRCAPRCA uses PR
Page 215 and 216:
• Idioms, and existing/new images
Page 217 and 218:
• Systems thinkingSituations are
Page 219 and 220:
5.11 Participatory Extension Approa
Page 221 and 222:
During implementation, new question
Page 223 and 224:
Purpose of community mobilizationCo
Page 225 and 226:
Step 2: Identifying potential leade
Page 227 and 228:
Step 9: Implementing selected proje
Page 229 and 230:
• Aim for a comprehensive respons
Page 231 and 232:
Bianchi RR and Kossoudji SA. 2001.
Page 233 and 234:
4. Information storage, whether man
Page 235 and 236:
Evaluation in general addresses fou
Page 237 and 238:
6.1.4 ImpactThe term ‘impact’ m
Page 239 and 240:
Box 6.2. Types of research outputTh
Page 241 and 242:
quantitative methods. Retrospective
Page 243 and 244:
Table 6.1. Impact types, techniques
Page 245 and 246:
However, the ARR measure is not alw
Page 247 and 248:
2. It can contribute to the develop
Page 249 and 250:
evaluation. The evaluators collect
Page 251 and 252:
In order to make this step particip
Page 253 and 254:
• The third style is when the eva
Page 255 and 256:
attributes, traits or characteristi
Page 257 and 258:
• Experience suggests that it is
Page 259 and 260:
This means that:- Inaccurate observ
Page 261 and 262:
is appropriate, such as tables, gra
Page 263 and 264:
• Looks at both internal and exte
Page 265 and 266:
• It is useful for process monito
Page 267 and 268:
• What information do we need and
Page 269 and 270:
Who? Which provides the partners, s
Page 271:
www.ilri.orgISBN 92-9146-234-9
show all

Concepts and practices in agricultural extension in developing ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?