12 pages., Via online journal., Rural Resources Centers (RRCs) managed by community-based organisations, where farmers come together for training and demonstration, have been an innovative extension approach in Cameroon since 2006. This paper describes information flow in RRCs and farmers’ assessment of RRCs as information sources. All the RRCs in Cameroon were studied and 29 group interviews, involving 118 producers and 7 individual interviews with RRC managers, were performed. RRCs share information with several stakeholders including farmers, research institutions, and educational and religious institutions; and interpersonal channels are commonly used. Farmers and agricultural extension workers are the most important sources of information for RRCs. Farmers rank RRCs as their second best sources of information after fellow farmers. On average, each year, RRCs organise at least 40 training sessions for about 1777 participants. The themes are mainly agroforestry (29%), marketing (20%), group dynamics (20%) and post-harvest techniques (11%). The issue of funding the activities of the RRCs needs to be addressed, they need to be better structured, and their human resources increased and strengthened.
10 pages., Via online journal., In 18 East German municipalities, nine of them with a planned pig production site and the other nine with an existing pig production site, a survey was carried out on the factors influencing the acceptance of pig production. The influencing factors examined were the personal attitude on particular aspects of pig production, socio-demographic characteristics, the personal involvement in local decision-making, the size of livestock and the production technology. As a result, existing production sites are perceived more positively than planned sites, without any influence of size and production technology. The difference may be explained by the fact that planned sites are evaluated in respect to economic arguments as jobs and income (market goods), while existing sites are rather evaluated in respect to environmental factors (public goods). For new investments the results lead to the recommendation to emphasize its economic aspects, to integrate the investor socially in the rural community and to apply technology that prevents pollution for the neighborhood. More importantly, the results show the shortcomings of a “top down” approach and the indispensability of endogenous resources in regional development.
24 pages., ISSN: 1712-8277, via online journal., Communication for innovation in agriculture and rural development involves
interactive and multi-stakeholder approaches that mobilize ideas and resources
from the public and private sectors as well as civil society. Digital tools broadly
referred to as Web 2.0 technologies, and in particular, social media such as
Facebook, Twitter, blogs and webinars are allegedly channels of communication
for innovation. These tools potentially offer support for collective learning
processes and co-creation of knowledge. There is little evidence, however, to
substantiate that new media are enabling innovation by and among stakeholders of
agri-food and rural systems. Are diverse agri-food producers, rural entrepreneurs,
scientists or researchers, community-level volunteers and public servants
interacting more effectively in Web 2.0 environments? Are social media
reinventing agri-food and rural information flows? Employing methods of multiple
database searches, review of literature, and content analysis of 50 relevant online
communities this paper identifies emerging issues in the development and use of
social media in the agri-food and rural sectors with an emphasis on data from
Ontario and, to a lesser extent, elsewhere in Canada. Findings suggest that the
uptake of social media is still in an early, exploratory phase associated with modest
opportunities and relevant limitations of Web 2.0 mediated multi-stakeholder
collaboration. Notably, there are gaps in giving and receiving feedback which are
intrinsic to dyadic communication as well as innovation processes. Limitations
identified include (a) conflicting perceptions among stakeholders about the use,
risk, credibility and institutional incentives associated with social media, and (b)
lack of capacity that enables use and development of appropriate social media
applications. The paper concludes by summarizing the importance of autonomous,
user-oriented applications of Web 2.0 tools in agri-food and rural systems.
