9 pages., Via online journal., In a world where the notion of ‘sharing of knowledge’ has been gained much prominence in the recent past, the importance of information and communications technologies (ICTs) to promote sustainable agriculture, especially when combined with mobile and open source software technologies is discussed critically. On this rationale, this study was carried out to explore the applicability of the concept of converging ‘Free and Open Source Software (FOSS)’ to promote sustainable knowledge sharing amongst the agricultural communities in Sri Lanka. A multi-stage community consultative process with a set of designated officials (“Sponsors”) and a series of semi-structured questionnaire survey with a cross section of smallholder agriculture farmers (n=246), were carried out in the Batticaloa, Kurunegala and Puttalam districts to gather the baseline data. This was followed by a number of field experiments (“Campaigns”) with the farmers (n=340) from same geographical areas. The two FOSS, namely: (1) “FrontlineSMS” for ‘Text Messaging’ and (2) “FreedomFone” for ‘Interactive Voice Responses’, were applied to evaluate the effectiveness of knowledge sharing within the farming communities. It was found that FOSS intervention increases the ‘Text messaging’ and ‘Voice Call’ usage in day-to-day agricultural communication by 26 and 8 percent, respectively. The demographic factors like age and income level of the farmers has positively influence on the knowledge sharing process. And also the ‘Mobile Telephony’ was the most extensive mode of communication within the communities. The outcome of analysis, as a whole, implies that, with a fitting mechanism in place, this approach can be promoted as a “drive for positive changes” in agriculture-based rural communities in developing countries like Sri Lanka, and those in South and East Asia with similar socio-economic and cultural perspectives.
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.
13 pages., via online journal., Drawing on the increasing body of literature on policy stakeholders and the ever-growing acknowledgement that communication policy is crafted by more than just parliamentarians and formal communication regulators this paper examines the role that another set of regulators plays in communication policy: agriculture regulators. Based on a study of the United States Department of Agriculture's Rural Utilities Service (RUS), this paper explores alternative agents of communication policy. More specifically, through document analysis we examine the way in which the Rural Utilities Service has shaped rural broadband policy in the United States over the last three decades. The implications for this research are wide, as it brings another policy actor into the policy making melee, and pushes communication policy scholars to consider the role that non-traditional communication regulators play in the communication policy making process.
