Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 95 Document Number: C07482
Notes:
James F. Evans Collection, cited reference, In: T.S. Osteria and J.Y. Okamura, eds. Participatory Approaches to Development: Experiences in the Philippines. Manila, Philippines: De La Salle University Research Center, 1986. p. 77101
Evaluation of the factors influencing the adoption of agricultural and natural resource management technologies among small farmers in developing countries have been mostly limited to qualitative discussions or simple descriptive statistics resulting in superficial and inconclusive findings. This study introduces the use of Poisson Count Regressions as a statistically appropriate procedure to analyze certain common types of adoption data. It uses them to assess the impact of key socio-economic, bio-physical, and institutional factors on the adoption of integrated pest management, agroforestry, and soil conservation technologies among small farmers in three Central American countries: Costa Rica, Panama, and El Salvador
Kaine, Geoff (author), Seymour, Eloise (author), Wright, Vic (author), and Longley, Sam (author)
Format:
Abstract
Publication Date:
2013-08
Published:
Australia
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Document Number: D02423
Notes:
Page 39 - Abstract of a paper presented at the International Conference of the Australasia Pacific Extension Network (APEN), Lincoln University, Christchurch, New Zealand, August 26-28, 2013. 100 pages.
Chattopadhyay, S. N. (author), Pareek, Udai (author), and Small Industry Extension Training Institute, Hyderabad, India; Small Industry Extension Training Institute, Hyderabad, India
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
1967
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 43 Document Number: B05154
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 196 Document Number: D08080
Notes:
John L. Woods Collection, Working paper. Development Training and Commuication Planning, UNDP Asia and Pacific Programme, Bangkok, Thailand. 1976, 11 pages.
Paulson, Curtis E. (author), Whaley, Sherrie R. (author), and Graduate Teaching Associate, Agricultural Communications, Department of Agricultural Education, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH; Assistant Professor, Department of Agricultural Education, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
Format:
Conference paper
Publication Date:
1990-07
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 80 Document Number: C04637
Notes:
Mimeographed, 1990. 16 p. (Paper presented at the International Conference of Agricultural Communicators in Education; 1990 July 14-18; St Paul, MN.)
AGRICOLA IND 92034694, The cooperative extension system in American agriculture is widely viewed as the paradigmatic public sector technology transfer system. Empirical evidence supports the view that research and extension are complementary inputs in increasing agricultural productivity. Cooperative extension, however, does not perceive itself as a technology transfer system; but as an informal education system. Many participants at the federal, land grant university, or county levels in cooperative extension would not recognize their work within a technology transfer framework. Moreover, many would object to such a characterization of their work. The differences in perspective is accounted for, in part, by the fact that agricultural extension is part of the larger system of cooperative extension. This system, which encompasses agriculture, home economics, 4-H and community and rural development, requires a more encompassing framework than technology transfer to provide an integrated rationale for its program elements. Within the technology transfer framework, the roles of the different components of the system across the states are both highly variable and changing. Based on site interviews in nine states, analysis is presented of the current and prospective roles of extension specialists and county agents. (original)
