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.
Brown, Brendan (author), Nuberg, Ian (author), Llewellyn, Rick (author), and School of Agriculture, Food and Wine, The University of Adelaide
CSIRO Agriculture
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2018
Published:
Elsevier
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 16 Document Number: D10460
10 pages., Via online journal., Conservation Agriculture (CA) is a knowledge-intensive set of practices which requires substantial access to functional agricultural extension services to enable utilisation. Despite this importance, the perspectives of those providing extension services to smallholder farmers have not been fully investigated. To address this, we qualitatively explore the perspectives of agricultural extension providers across six African countries to understand why uptake of CA has been limited, as well as the institutional changes that may be required to facilitate greater utilisation. Across the diversity of geographical, political and institutional contexts between countries, we find multiple commonalities in the constrained utilisation of CA by smallholder farmers, highlighting the difficulties non-mechanised subsistence farmers face in transitioning to market-oriented farming systems such as CA. The primary constraint relates to the economic viability of market-oriented farming where farmers remain in low input and low output systems with limited exit points. The assumed exit point used by CA programs appears to have led to a culture of financial expectancy and reflects a continuation of top-down extension approaches with inadequate modification of CA to the contextual realities of subsistence farmers. If African agricultural systems are to be sustainably intensified, we find a need for greater flexibility within extension systems in the pursuit of sustainable intensification. If extension systems are to persist with CA, it will need to be promoted through more transitional pathways that disaggregate the CA package, and with that there is a need for the provision of a mandate to, and necessary funding for, more participatory extension services.
Landini, Fernando (author) and Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnicas (National Council of Scientific and Technological Research), Argentina
University of La Cuenca del Plata, Argentina
University of Moron, Argentina
Format:
Online journal article
Publication Date:
2015-04-15
Published:
Argentina: Elsevier
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D10882
9 pages, online journal article, Quality rural extension is of utmost importance for generating food security and sustainable rural development. In this paper, Argentine rural extensionists' point of view on how to be a good practitioner is described, as well as compared to good practices proposed by scholars and international development organizations. Forty rural extensionists from the Northeastern Argentine provinces were interviewed (29men, 11 women). Interviews were recorded and transcribed, texts were categorized and contents analyzed. Scholars and extensionists, despite agreeing to most of the same principles, frame their recommendations for good extension practices in different ways. The former's recommendations tend to be supported by multiple case studies and focused on best practices on the level of extension projects or policies, while the latter's tend to draw upon their own experience and develop proposals more concerned with interpersonal interactions and with overcoming practical problems in real (and not ideal)settings. Best extension practices depend on environmental, institutional, political and cultural contexts, this implying there is no best extension practice in general. Training extensionists in interpersonal skills and in social sciences is key for reaching good extension results. Horizontal communication between farmers and extensionists, negotiation over best technologies, and helping farmers reflect on their production practices are extension strategies with great potential.
