26 pages, via online journal, Purpose
This paper is concerned with the impact of the University of California Cooperative Extension (UCCE) on regional productivity in California agriculture. UCCE is responsible for agricultural research and development (R&D), and dissemination of agricultural know-how in the state.
Method/methodology/approach
We estimate the effect of UCCE on county-level agricultural productivity for the years 1992–2012, using an agricultural production function with measures of agricultural extension inputs alongside the traditional agricultural production inputs at the county level.
Findings
Results show a positive impact of UCCE through its stock of depreciated expenditures. For an additional dollar spent on UCCE expenditures stock, agricultural productivity, measured as value of sales at the county level, improves by $1–9 per acre of farmland for knowledge/expenditure depreciation rates between 0 and 20 percent.
Practical implications
Results suggest that county differences in productivity could affect extension expenditures. The high level of contribution found in the results would be especially useful during a period of political pressure to reduce public spending for agricultural extension in the state.
Theoretical implications
Theoretical implications suggest that agricultural systems with higher level of knowledge depreciation are associated with higher resulting incremental agricultural productivity per an additional dollar spent on UCCE expenditures stock. This suggests that extension policy should consider also the agricultural system (crop mix).
Originality
We use original budgetary data that was collected especially for answering our research questions from archives of UCCE. We estimate impact of extension at the county level in California, on the value of agricultural sales (of crops and livestock). We developed an extension expenditure stock, using current and past expenditures data, and different depreciation rates, following the theory of Knowledge Production Function.
20 pages, via online journal, Purpose: To examine the factors that support and hinder farmers’ learning and to investigate the impact of an innovative learning program on farmers’ practice change.
Design/methodology/approach: Individual interviews and focus group discussions were held with 24 farmers over 20 months. Observations were made of these farmers as they participated with eight agricultural and social scientists in a range of innovative experiences to learn about chicory and plantain establishment and management. These learning experiences were designed around evidence-informed educational pedagogies. Data sets were analyzed using NVivo to determine common themes of affordances and barriers to learning and actual practice changes.
Findings: The affordances for learning and practice change include belonging to a learning community, enhancing self-efficacy, engaging with scientists, seeing relative advantage, reinforcing and validating learning, supporting system’s integration and developing an identity as learners. Barriers to learning and practice change include issues of: trialability, complexity, compatibility and risk.
Practical implications: The importance of basing new models of extension around evidence-informed pedagogies known through educational research to promote learning and practice change.
Theoretical implications: Sociocultural theory and self-efficacy theories of learning are critical to the success of effective agricultural extension programs.
Originality: To date, little empirical research about the affordances and barriers for pastoral farmers’ learning has been based on contemporary educational research.
