17 pages, via online journal, The greatest challenge now facing agricultural science is not how to increase production overall but how to enable resource-poor farmers to produce more.
The transfer-of-technology (TOT) model of agricultural research is part of the normal professionalism of agricultural scientists. In this model, scientists largely determine research priorities, develop technologies in controlled conditions, and then hand them over to agricultural extension to transfer to farmers. Although strong structures and incentives sustain this normal professionalism, many now recognise the challenge of its bad fit with the needs and conditions of hundreds of millions of resource-poor farm (RPF) families. In response to this problem, the TOT model has been adapted and extended through multi-disciplinary farming systems research (FSR) and on-farm trials. These responses retain power in the hands of scientists. Information is obtained from farmers and processed and analysed in order to identify what might be good for them. A missing element is methods to encourage and enable resource-poor farmers themselves to meet and work out what they need and want.
Kristjanson, P (author), Place, F (author), Franzel, F (author), Thornton, P.K. (author), and International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
International Centre for Research on Agroforestry, Nairobi, Kenya
Format:
Online journal article
Publication Date:
2002-02-23
Published:
Kenya: Science Direct
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 109 Document Number: D10958
20 pages, via online journal, In this paper we provide evidence to show that farmers' perspectives on poverty processes and outcomes are critical in the early stages of evaluating impact of agricultural research on poverty. We summarize lessons learned from farmer impact assessment workshops held in five African locations, covering three agro-ecological zones and five different agroforestry and livestock technologies arising from collaborative national–international agricultural research. Poverty alleviation is a process that needs to be understood before impact can be measured. Workshops such as those we describe can help researchers to identify farmers' different ways of managing and using a technology and likely effects, unanticipated impacts, major impacts to pursue in more quantitative studies, the primary links between agricultural technology and poverty, and key conditioning factors affecting adoption and impact that can be used to stratify samples in more formal analyses. Farmer workshops inform other qualitative and quantitative impact assessment methods. We discuss the linkage of farmer-derived information with GIS-based approaches that allow more complete specification of recommendation domains and broader-scale measurement of impact.
7 pages., via online journal, There are approximately 65 dairy farms in Mississippi (Gregory, 2019) with an estimated annual milk value of $26 million (Mississippi Farm Bureau, n.d.). Mastitis is the most expensive disease in the dairy industry (Neeser, Hueston, Godden, & Bey, 2006) and can decrease milk production by 1,181 kg per lactation in multiparous cows (Wilson et al., 2004). Clinical mastitis accounts for the largest use of antibiotics in livestock species (Thomson, Rantala, Hautala, Pyörälä, & Kaartinen, 2008), a circumstance that raises concerns of antimicrobial resistance (Pol & Ruegg, 2007; Wang et al., 2015) and increases producer expenses due to purchasing antibiotics and discarding milk during treatment (Rollin, Dhuyvetter, & Overton, 2015). On-farm bacteriological culturing (OFBC) enables producers to distinguish among broad categories of microorganisms with great accuracy and provides results within 24 hr, versus approximately a week when cultures are sent to a laboratory (Down, Bradley, Breen, & Green, 2017). Despite the availability of several viable OFBC systems, adoption of OFBC in Mississippi has been limited.
The purpose of the study reported here was to implement and evaluate an OFBC pilot test with a small sample of Mississippi dairy producers. The objectives of the study were
to identify reasons for producers' lack of OFBC adoption,
to explore change in producers' knowledge and perceptions of OFBC before and after trial, and
to assess the effectiveness of an Extension-led trialing program relative to OFBC adoption.
13 pages, via online journal, In recent years there has been a great deal of interest in farming systems research (FSR) as a means of getting formal research and extension systems to work with and respond to the needs of resource-poor farmers. However, the results of many FSR programmes have been disappointing. This paper reviews a number of ‘successful’ FSR activities and argues that the development and use of research approaches and methods cannot be separated from the political, economic and institutional context in which they were developed and used. A closer examination of some of the new FSR methods shows that an understanding of the specific context in which these activities were developed and used is essential to understanding the potential relevance of the methods/approaches to other circumstances. A lack of an historical perspective concerning the source and advocacy of new FSR approaches and methods is one of the reasons why many FSR programmes in the past have given rise to disappointing results.
21 pages, via online journal, Purpose: This article outlines the emergence of programme teams in the Australian dairy farm sector as a response to counter weaknesses in the institutional environment for agricultural innovation which favours technology adoption/diffusion approaches.
Design/methodology/approach: The strengths, weaknesses and risks of different approaches to innovation in the Australian dairy sector RD&E system are analysed and key features of an emerging programme team approach defined. The programme team approach is compared and contrasted with the features of innovation capacity from international literature. An analysis of the relative investment in this innovation capacity in different topics or domains of dairy innovation is provided.
Findings: The programme team approach to innovation involves groups of researchers, extension people, public and private organisations, farmers, community groups, and policy and service groups brought together to progress innovation and change in a topic area or domain. Leadership of the process is provided by an area expert or champion. The team takes responsibility for: (a) understanding the businesses of key players who have an influence in the innovation or domain; (b) deciding the nature of the desired change that all stakeholders can align to; (c) identifying features of the enabling environment to establish what capacity is needed; (d) designing a ‘route to change’ strategy (in contrast to traditional route-to-market thinking); and (e) piloting and refining the approach within the target populations. The group manages emerging risks and keeps on top of issues, as well as identifies any knowledge gaps for research that are preventing innovation and change.
Conclusions/practical implications: The programme team approach provides a semi-formal governance mechanism for innovation to develop, despite an institutional environment that favours technology adoption. Further, the activities of programme teams consist of practices which integrate research-led and demand-pull approaches. Currently, investment in such innovation capacity is relatively low and highly variable across different topic domains.
Added value: The article provides tangible activities that managers of agricultural RD&E programmes can invest in to progress systemic approaches to innovation and is a guide for agricultural education and extension practitioners to proceed in their innovation work.
12 pages., An extraordinary moment of agricultural modernization is currently underway due to innovations in Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). In this process, management precepts are renewed, fostering significant gains in efficiency, productivity, and sustainable use of natural resources and the environment. The growing supply of ICTs and the extension of connectivity in rural areas, with their transforming roles in productive practices and economic relations, bring about questions regarding their impacts. These technologies include precision positioning systems and large volume databases, electronic sensors of site-specific production and environmental conditions, repositories of relational data, statistical and crop forecasting software, methodologies and processes; web-based information services, among others. The assessment of impacts focused on ICTs for agriculture needs innovative approaches, due to the peculiarities of their applications, the different scales of their socioenvironmental scopes and, at the same time, the verification of effectiveness of institutional investments on research, development, and innovation (RD&I). Based on these premises, the objectives of this work are to present a ‘module of impact indicators for Information and Communication Technologies (Ambitec-TICs)’, and assess its application to six typical technology adoption cases resulting from agricultural RD&I projects. The results detail critical analyses of the contributions of the proposed module for the registration, interpretation, and communication of impacts, with recommendations for technology transfer and accountability in institutional Social Balance documentation.
9 pages, via online journal, The overall willingness of smallholder farmers to adopt new green technologies remains low, in spite of the great progress made in understanding the factors that affect their decision. The present study introduces an interdisciplinary approach combining positive psychology and sustainable development studies to show that two personal resources – self-control (a learned repertoire of goal-directed skills that enable people to act upon their aims) and cognitive goal-oriented hope (the ability to follow different routes to pursue one's goal), prompt the adoption of technologies by smallholder farmers. Both personal resources facilitate achieving future goals and changing existing circumstances. A theoretical moderation model on the adoption of agricultural technologies aimed to protect soil degradation in Nepal is proposed and empirically tested. Data were collected from 268 households in the Jhapa district by a face-to-face questionnaire. A multiple regression analysis tested and confirmed the hypothesized moderation model. Following the discovery of a significant interaction, the nature of the interaction was farther explored by calculating simple slopes. Analysis results show a significant positive connection between self-control (p-value = 0.002), hope (p-value = 0.005), information (p-value < 0.001), and technology adoption. Self-control was also found to have a significant moderating effect in enhancing a positive association between receiving information and technology adoption (p-value = 0.017). In addition to its theoretical innovation and empirical contribution, the importance of this study lies in its practical implications, given that policy, education, and communication may influence hope and self-control levels.
