33 pages, A key factor in determining the future of agricultural extension efforts is ensuring that the voices of those who need to be heard are represented at all stages of the decision-making process. As agricultural extension becomes increasingly globalized, it is critical that the diversity of voices represented within capacity assessments likewise increases. Using two distinct approaches, the present study attempts to address a current gap within the extension literature specifically related to extension assessment respondent groups. First, 97 extension related assessment manuscripts were identified during a literature review and analyzed for respondent group. The results indicated most studies included only one respondent group. Among these assessments clientele and Beneficiaries and Formal Power Roles were the respondent group categories most frequently examined. Next, a primary study was conducted to identify which respondent groups should be represented in capacity assessment according to agricultural extension experts. The panelists had the highest level of agreement regarding the inclusion of extension clientele and beneficiaries within capacity assessments. However, panelists agreed that representation from outside influences and formal power roles were also important to include in the capacity assessment process. The results indicate extension networks should purposively include a diverse set of respondents when conducting assessments to ensure a comprehensive perspective is represented.
19 pages, The COVID-19 pandemic has drastically affected people's lives around the world, including agricultural extension workers. To date, few studies have been conducted to understand the adaptation of extension services in Latin American countries during the pandemic. This mixed-methods study explored Latin-American extension professionals’ preparation to implement knowledge-sharing activities and sought to understand extension professionals' responsiveness to COVID-19. The results revealed significant differences in extension responsiveness, between field extension workers and in-office extension workers. Delving into this difference revealed that field extension professionals perceived lower responsiveness because they were not able to continue their pre-pandemic, face-to-face activities in the field with farmers; on the other hand, office extension workers were able to complete and respond to their annual program objectives by increasing institutional partnerships by virtual means. Resilience was found in the two phases of this study. Extension professionals were viewed by farmers as a reliable resource for addressing COVID-19 challenges. Extension professionals began using new communications technologies to train farmers, even though they were not trained in these technologies themselves. It will be important to begin formally incorporating the use of new technology, and alternative communication strategies with communities during crises, as part of preparation for field technicians.
