Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.
AGRICULTURAL
EXTENSION SYSTEMS
COALITION
Alternate models for agricultural and rural
extensions in developing world
System...
A growing consensus has recognized that agricultural
extension systems must be pluralistic networks of
institutions provid...
3	
  
The current agriculture and rural extension models are dominated by public systems.
It is estimated that approximate...
4	
  
To abstract the illustration 1.0, the public
sector extension has a legacy of working in
isolation. Rigid hierarchy ...
5	
  
extent of services received by the medium and small scale commercial farmers do not receive
devoted extension servic...
6	
  
SLO County food system coalition: Representative case study 1.0 1
The Concept:
The Food System Coalition was founded...
Framework for comprehensive food security system #
7	
  
Centralized coalition committee:
To smoothen administrative and o...
8	
  
Envisage the ‘System Coalition’ model in agricultural extension
The system coalition aims to build vibrant, sustaina...
9	
  
As shown in the illustration 4.0, the new system coalition model is likely to transform the
extension model from mer...
© 2014 All Rights Reserved.
IKP Center for Advancement in Agricultural Practice
Abdul Rahman Ilyas
Chief Executive Officer...
Prochain SlideShare
Chargement dans…5
×

Agricultural Extension Systems Coalition White Paper ARIlyas

185 vues

Publié le

  • Soyez le premier à commenter

  • Soyez le premier à aimer ceci

Agricultural Extension Systems Coalition White Paper ARIlyas

  1. 1. AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SYSTEMS COALITION Alternate models for agricultural and rural extensions in developing world Systems Coalition Approach to Agricultural Extension & optimize Knowledge & Technology diffusion Mainstreaming small holder farmer as an important stakeholder for bottom up agricultural advisory Publica(on  By   Abdul  Rahman  Ilyas   IKP  Center  for  Advancement  in   Agricultural  Prac(ce  (ICAAP)   Thanjavur,  India  
  2. 2. A growing consensus has recognized that agricultural extension systems must be pluralistic networks of institutions providing varied information and innovation services. Such extension systems must be demand-driven with closer linkages to clients, must become more efficient, and must develop more sustainable sources of financing. Increasingly, extension services should be market driven integrated services that are tailor made to meet the needs of the clients. Adapted from World Bank center for agriculture and rural development 2  
  3. 3. 3   The current agriculture and rural extension models are dominated by public systems. It is estimated that approximately 95%1 of over 800,0002 official extension personnel globally. Developing countries account for approximately 2/3 of the extension staff worlwide3. However, despite decades of investments and experience with public extension programs, evidence of their impact upon agricultural knowledge, adoption and production system development are limited. Furthermore, the systems themselves have been criticized for high costs, problems of scale and low levels of accountability4 Contemporary agricultural extension models in developing countries To elaborate further, the contemporary models are unprepared and stretched by ever increasing dynamics and complex situations the agricultural sector is facing today. The following illustration clearly elucidates the drawbacks of current public system agricultural extension models in developing countries. In addition the illustration also underlines the minimal participation by private entities in agricultural knowledge system development unlike the developed countries 1,3. FAO world agricultural report 2. The State of Agricultural Extension: An Overview and New Caveats for the Future, 2013 by Amanda Bensona & Tahseen Jafryb* 4. Jenny C. Aker (2011). Center for Global Development Working Paper 269, September. Forthcoming in Agricultural Economics. Technology Generation Technology Transfer Technology Utilization •  Technology development •  Technology assessment •  Technology testing •  Message development •  Training & backstopping •  Delivery strategy •  Technology distribution & •  sales •  Technology multiplication Output/ production •  Awareness information trial •  Farm level adaptation •  Technology adoption Agricultural macro policy Illustration 1.0: Agricultural knowledge system chain and limitations of extension models (Adapted from Swanson, Sands, & Peterson model Feedback flow Limitations of current public extension systems Limitations of current public extension systems Extension models today are implemented mostly by the public and NGO settings in developing countries with increase in private standalone models fast catching up.
  4. 4. 4   To abstract the illustration 1.0, the public sector extension has a legacy of working in isolation. Rigid hierarchy centralized modes of planning, tradition of assessing performance in terms of technology adoption, a history of rewarding only success and thus a reluctance to report and analyze reasons of failure; a history of working independently and a mistrust of other agencies; and a tradition of up-ward accountability for resource utilization rather than output achievement and client satisfaction are plaguing the knowledge dissemination in developing countries.1 Further the public sector systems don’t realize the importance of feedback flow among the stakeholders. This often leads to development of innovations that are irrelevant to the beneficiaries. Private sector participation in extension Private sector models can be classified as private not for profit delivered by NGOs and private for profit (delivered by commercial production and marketing firms (such as input manufacturers and distributors). Countries like the US, Canada, Australia, and Denmark, which have very advanced agricultural sectors, have always enjoyed strong private extension services which are lacking in developing countries. However, to mitigate the limitations of the public sector extension systems, private and business entities started developing their own extension models off late which have resulted in cost escalations, whilst ROI of such models is yet to be ascertained as specified in illustration 2.0. 1. Citation from NABARD study on private role in agricultural systems Seed Fertilizers Pesticides Farm Inputs Farm machinery Processing Beneficiary Independent extension systems built by private sector Most of the systems are recreations with multiple investments in infrastructure, human resources The beneficiary is subjected to Information dump and conflicting messages Illustration 2.0: Private extension systems that are independent and reinventions of models
  5. 5. 5   extent of services received by the medium and small scale commercial farmers do not receive devoted extension services in developing countries. The study also highlights that one out of every five economically active person in agriculture receives the extension services; surprisingly only about one fourth of the extension agent’s time is dedicated to education and training services in developing countries1. Hence it is clearly evident that irrespective of the spurt of activities by research agencies, public systems, private businesses contemporary models of extension systems the unmet needs i.e. diffusion of global agricultural knowledge to the small holder farmer, reduction of duplication with emphasis on efficiency, cost mitigation in extension systems and more importantly sustainability of the systems still remain. It is evident that the conventional public and private extension models fail to address the challenges of beneficiary coverage, system duplications, productivity and sustainability in agricultural knowledge dissemination ecosystem; this prompts for the stakeholders especially the private players to look for alternative models and lessons exist in food system models in the form of ‘system coalitions’ 1.  FAO world agricultural report It is to be noted that varied agencies that are accountable for research (CGIAR consortium etc.) are getting in to creating own systems of extension. In addition, developing world also witnesses NGO operated extension models. Irrespective of these diverse activities a huge hiatus is being experienced in knowledge dissemination and practical applicability. For instance, it remains to be seen the extent of penetration and applicability (among small/ medium farmers) of some of the best technologies developed by CGIAR consortium in developing countries. To support this argument, a study conducted by the FAO the - Alternate models for agricultural extension: Lessons from food system coalitions The search for the alternate models can borrow learning from allied sector, the food system coalitions. The coalitions were able to bring varied stakeholders from Government to business partners to civil society to academicians with the objective to enhance food security to communities/counties they work for. These systems are coalition networks of varied knowledge partners and create a sustainable social enterprises to execute the projects; the coalition undertakes the mentoring, project and performance appraisals of the promoted social enterprises.
  6. 6. 6   SLO County food system coalition: Representative case study 1.0 1 The Concept: The Food System Coalition was founded in June, 2011 by representatives from nonprofits, businesses, and government agencies from the social services, producers (farming, ranching, fishing), health, education, distribution, consumers, gardening, and retail. The FSC brings together stakeholders from diverse sectors to generate changes that will strengthen the local food system. The Operating model: The Food System Coalition, or FSC, is a collaborative network that brings together many sectors, from consumer groups to County government agencies, the Farm Bureau to the fishing community. Projects conducted by partner organizations are supported by the Coalition, which also forms its own projects to strengthen the local food system. The FSC is currently hosted by the Food Bank Coalition of San Luis Obispo County. Short-term and long-term work groups are formed around key issues and can include both Coalition members and other interested people. An elected Administrative Committee takes care of administrative functions. 1.  http://www.slofoodbank.org/board_of_directors.php 2.,3. Hunger free communities; characterizing the vulnerable population in San Luis Obispo county 2012 report prepared by Aydin Nazmi and Alexandra Lund Coalition of varied stakeholders acting as mentor for social enterprise with an accountable administration fostered the programme mileage case of the FSC at San Louis Obsipo county. Moreover the programme also highlights the need to involve varied stakeholders in planning and feedback process so as to ensure seamless movement of communication; Key take away: Coalitions to gain mileage and mitigate duplication: The concept was able to build active networks in the county within a short span of time1 Ability to reach majority of the beneficiaries: Leverage networks to promote awareness and within two years the models was able to reach 82% of target beneficiaries2 Consistent feedback collection: The programme banked on surveys and inputs provided by the beneficiaries across varied socio-economic class to streamline the operational model3
  7. 7. Framework for comprehensive food security system # 7   Centralized coalition committee: To smoothen administrative and operational functions thus striving for accountability and transparency Focused and collective approach The programme involved diverse stakeholders who have been participating in the planning process thus avoiding duplication of efforts while promoting a streamlined approach to strengthen the local food system 1. http://www.community-food.org/overview/ # The framework represented is the extract in original from the website and is for information purposes only. Neither the author nor IKAAP claims the thought ownership of the framework and acknowledging that the ownership of framework is with community and regional food systems US. Project components include research, community engagement, out reach efforts, education and advocacy. The coalition aims to promote   the   development  of  equitable,  sustainable,  and   inclusive   Community   and   Regional   Food   Systems.   Community and regional food systems of Milwaukee, Chicao and Detroit: Representative case study 2.0 1 The Concept: The mission of this project is to integrate research, outreach, education and advocacy in order to better understand, develop and sustain community and regional food systems (CRFS) as a means of addressing food insecurity and related goals in American cities. The project partners include the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Growing Power, the University of Wisconsin- Extension, Michigan State University, Michael Fields Agricultural Institute, and Iowa State University, in addition to community-based organizations in cities: Milwaukee, Chicago, Detroit, Boston, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, Cedar Rapids, IA and Madison, WI.
  8. 8. 8   Envisage the ‘System Coalition’ model in agricultural extension The system coalition aims to build vibrant, sustainable, and inclusive extension systems. The coalition model work integrates research, community engagement, outreach, education, and advocacy. Research and dissemination of new models form the crux of the efforts. The coalition model also aims to collect feedback and convey the same for stakeholders for relevant actions and corrective measures. Sustainability ProsperityKnowledge Dissemination Participation Businesses Academicians Government Expert group coalition Community entrepreneurs Research groups Programme administration Project monitoring & appraisals Research on new extension models and systems Qualified resources in the community and importantly proximal to beneficiaries Illustration 3.0: Representative system coalition extension platform 1 2 3 4 1 Participation of stakeholders •  Adoption of new technologies •  Community involvement •  Business involvement 2 Knowledge dissemination •  Input knowledge •  Farm practices •  Product handling •  Feedback delivery •  Equitable access 3 Sustainability •  Comprehensive farm land protection •  Scope to monetize the knowledge •  Increased scope for interplay of agro allied sectors 4 Prosperity •  Multiple level of sustainable livelihood creation •  Accountable access to capital/finance •  Economic viability of farms Illustration 4.0:Extension dynamics ushered by the coalition system models We can envisage that these coalition based models like food organizations will lead to the development of tools, educational curriculum, and training programs on community, agricultural practices, access to finance etc. under the mentorship of an expert group.
  9. 9. 9   As shown in the illustration 4.0, the new system coalition model is likely to transform the extension model from mere service delivery model to more of an enabler. In addition the system also strives for increased participation from the communities thus creating an environment of seamless exchange of knowledge, messages and thought processes. To abstract, the model doesn’t stop at pushing through innovations and education based services but also created more comprehensive thinking around livelihoods, inclusiveness and more importantly sustainability of the rural enterprises thus providing a bigger bang per buck spent on the programmes. In current scenario, when certain standalone model innovations promoted by public systems, NGOs and businesses are criticized of lacking prac(cal   reali(es   of   adop(on,   knowledge   fragmenta(on,     and   inherent   challenges   to   promote   pluralism   and   innova(on,   the   coali(on    extension  model    is  likely  to  benefit  from  synergies  shared  by  stakeholders  and  can  likely   present  more  solu(on  based  approaches  to  challenges  faced  by  conven(on  extension  models The challenges the agricultural sector is facing are ever increasing and becoming complex. Consequently developments have also increased manifold in agricultural practices, technology platforms and approaches. The fast paced demands and the complex agricultural ecosystems are stretching contemporary extension service models, which otherwise have a crucial role to play in promoting agricultural innovation to keep pace with the changing context and improve livelihoods of the dependent poor.
  10. 10. © 2014 All Rights Reserved. IKP Center for Advancement in Agricultural Practice Abdul Rahman Ilyas Chief Executive Officer IKP Centre for Advancement in Agricultural Practice (ICAAP) - IIT Research Park, Chennai 600113, Tamil Nadu, India. - 7th Cross Arulananda Nagar, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu - IKP Knowledge Park, Genome Valley, Turkapally, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh, India Phone: +91 (44) 6668-7075 Mobile : +91-9840643774 Fax: +91 (44) 6668-7010 Email: abdulrahman.ilyas@icaap.org.in

×