8 pages, Agricultural extension can be defined as the entire set of organisations that support and facilitate people engaged in agricultural production to solve problems and to obtain information, skills and technologies to improve their livelihoods and well-being. Extension officials should ensure that farmers are engaged and capacitated so that they can make production decisions that are not in conflict with nature, yet such decisions ensure that their well-being is improved. With 75% of the world’s poor living in rural areas, the topic of improved agriculture through agricultural extension is viewed as central to poverty reduction. There have been questions posed by stakeholders (communities, policy-makers and politicians) about the non-visibility and accountability of agricultural extension in the communities that it is supposed to help. There are however a number of factors (perceived or real) that make agricultural extension less or not visible nor accountable. Therefore, this paper investigates and proposes a theoretical framework or model to ensure that agricultural extension is visible and accountable to all stakeholders. This will in turn ensure that there are noticeable increases or improvement of the lives of the resource poor farmers and communities.
12 pages., Via online journal., This article is concerned with the shaping of agricultural knowledge among farmers, in the context of the rapid changes Polish agriculture has been subject to since the time of the country's EU accession. The theoretical underpinnings of this work have been described in terms of the significant notional categories, i.e. knowledge, knowledge-cultures and sources of knowledge. The research made use of the joint interviews method. Interviews were run with representatives of different generations in 10 farming families in central Poland. The main research objective was to determine sources of farming knowledge among farmers. The use of joint interviews allowed for the identification of sources of knowledge of different kinds. These reflect a division into farmers' closer and more distant surroundings, i.e. to the family and neighbours on the one hand, and to institutions and media on the other. Knowledge acquisition among farmers is in fact found to be a complex process, reflecting socialisation in a multi-generation environment of family and neighbours, on the one hand, and the impact of the institutional and legal system, on the other. In a general sense, this corresponds to the well-known division of sources of knowledge into the tacit and the explicit, with the acquisition of tacit (i.e. informal) knowledge not meeting with any more major obstacles thanks to proximity in a sense that may be cultural (i.e. the agriculture itself), family-related (and in fact multi-generation) and spatial (physical proximity in a given locality). Microsocial conditioning thus plays a major role in the shaping of this source of knowledge. However, the most important factor distinguishing contemporary cultures as regards knowledge on farming is the capacity to adapt to conditions set by the institutions supporting the latter's development. Formal knowledge flowing into farming families from their institutional surroundings requires growing adaptability and preparation if a succession of innovations are to be taken on board. The multi-source nature of knowledge and the achievement of some kind of balance in this respect actually poses a major challenge for the future functioning of family farms as cultural microsystems.
7 pgs, Farmers’ markets may improve access to healthful foods in rural areas. Our objective was to identify facilitators and barriers to farmers’ market use in a rural county. We collected data via surveys, focus group sessions, and key informant interviews. Study participants identified the two existing farmers’ markets as community assets. Barriers to use farmers’ markets included inconvenient market hours, not accepting nutrition assistance program benefits, limited transportation, and limited variety. Interventions to improve food access should include ways to meet the needs of specific populations such as low-income residents and residents living in outlying areas without farmers’ markets.
18pgs, Can the power of digital communications create opportunities for overcoming generational renewal problems on farms? This interdisciplinary review explores the reported impacts of digital communication on career initiation into farming from a global perspective via the lens of career theories. Seventy-three papers were synthesized into two domains: (1) the impact of digital communication interactions on farming career initiation, and (2) the dynamics of digital communication initiatives that create opportunities to inspire youth into farming. The finding shows that the mainstream literature primarily aims to support the continuity of farming careers but pay little attention to the potential of digital communication to attract youth into farming. This review argues that career communications for farming receives insufficient attention, and could be better integrated into agricultural communications strategies by using the potential of digital communications. Study concludes that while economic and geographic factors, as well as societal and cultural norms, lead to negative perceptions on farming careers, there are three pathways that may contribute to breaking down these negative perceptions. Firstly, taking the changing nature of career motivations, such as the trend towards sustainable farming linked to self-fulfillment, among today’s youth into consideration is essential. Secondly, highlighting technological advances in digital agriculture practices, like geographical flexibility or innovation capacity of farming, for example, is important to increase awareness about new opportunities in the profession. Lastly, communication campaigns with targeted groups (e.g., young females) play a role to change the negative perceptions of the rural way of life and the farming profession.
11 pages., via online journal., Dependence of rural population on traditional fuel sources namely biomass has increased because of easy accessibility and affordability. The use of biomass fuels results in many environmental and health-related hazards. Rural households have little awareness about the ill effects of using biomass energy sources. This study investigated the patterns of rural household energy use and identified the role of information on the effects of biomasses on human health, in addition to other factors influencing households’ choices of energy sources. For this purpose, primary data from 196 households were collected from four districts of the Punjab province in Pakistan. Results showed that use of clean energy sources was limited to basic appliances and 90% of the respondents depended on biomass fuels. Estimates of the multivariate probit model showed that awareness about adverse impacts of biomass fuels as energy sources were significantly related with the choice of energy sources. Further, household head’s education level, household income, landholding, children under the age of 5 years and higher number of adult females were significantly related with the cleaner energy source choices. Distance to market increased the probability of the use of biomass energy sources. The study concluded that awareness campaigns regarding the benefits of using clean energy sources should be launched through print and electronic media while targeting rural women.
19 pages, A Small Farm Resource Center (SFRC) is an informal in-situ extension model used for testing promising agricultural and rural livelihoods options on a physical central site, with some measure of extension methodology. There is a need to evaluate SFRCs as research-extension models operating outside of formal government extension and advisory services. Seven SFRCs located in Southeast Asia were studied to classify extension methodologies adopted by those centers, evaluate extension efficacy, and to provide recommendations for amplifying their services. On average in 2013, SFRCs were 21.1 years old, covered 24.2 ha, cost 242,000 USD to establish and had a yearly operating cost of 28,500 USD. The work of the seven SFRCs could be classified into five predominant extension methodologies: on-site and off-site demonstrations, on-site and off-site trainings, and off-site extension outreach. Most of the SFRCs utilized combinations of these and tailored their methods to the particular context. Besides agricultural production, SFRCs also offered socio-cultural and socio-economic assistance, owing to a cycle of extension knowledge refinement. SFRCS were re-engaged in 2021 and all 7 were still operational, and the majority provided the same number or more services (57%) as in 2013, utilized the same amount of space (71%), and were perceived to have the same or more efficacy (71%) even in the face of decreasing or stagnating funding (71%) due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, SFRCs continue to be used successfully throughout Southeast Asia and provide cost-effective and needs-based extension and advisory services to underserved populations outside of formal extension services.
