occasional paper - 29 •^ 5rtr: agriculture … 29.pdf · preface the important role played by...
TRANSCRIPT
Occasional Paper - 29
• 5RTR:
AGRICULTURE EXTENSION: INVOLVEMENT OF PRIVATE SECTOR
ISJMf^U:'
DR. RASHEED SULAIMAN V.
Departnnent of Econonnic Analysis and Research
Notional Bonk for Agriculture and Rural Developnnent
Mumboi
2003
viHic^iRicb fsTsTaer Occasional Paper - 29
ftoft^^4]J|(iH AGRICULTURE EXTENSION:
INVOLVEMENT OF PRIVATE SECTOR
DR. RASHEED SULAIMAN V.
\jy
Deportment of Economic Analysis and Research
National Bonk for Agriculture and Rural Development
Mumbol
2003
4,W*M'y I Z ^ , Tfr. g=^ ^.11305 iJ?TT,^"fe^- 12
Author Dr. Rasheed Sulaiman V. Scientist National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research (NCAP) (Indian Council of Agricultural Research) Library Avenue, PB No 11305. Pusa, New Delhi-12
The opinions expressed are those of the author alone and not necessarily those of NABARD or NCAP
^cffe ^ ^-24, ' ^ ' icn%, ^ . Wf. ^. 8121, ¥ F ^ - ^ cbT«< cKi iV^ (TJ4), ^gsr . 400 051 W\ iJ^lf^ld. T ? ^ ct^M^^H, ettaK ^f^ (q.), g^ft - 400 013 gNT ^gfer I Published by National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development, Department of Economic Analysis and Research, 4* Floor, C Wing, Plot No,C-24, G Block, PB No. 8121, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbal-400 051 and Printed at Alco Corporation, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai.
11
y^lclHI
•fe^TPff ^ j f t s f r fwt £;WI-d<u| -^ 5r fTR (Uct- H i M) o^ ^RFc^^ ^jfe^T ^ ^-^Tt fcT
xMlcbK " f e n oTT giT #. T^ fq ^ ^ i t R ?TR TT T S^cTSJ 5 5 ^ ^ 3T^g5 ^ ^ffe^JfuT
SR TTII T[^ f , fqR ^ ? ^ cbl^pHtMicH W\ ^ETR^ U J ^ ^ c f f ^ | | #. ^ #5
^fim^ 3TT ^^Ttfcralf g5t K f R 4 ^ ? ^ ^1?, TRcT g t ^ JT^ R #5 ^ ; ^ f % g 5 q^ffR ^
oRRcT t j f t fg5 qTqg5 TT^^W ^ ^ ^ J ^ , Sl^frpT^ 3ftT 3T^ 3 R ^ g5t 3ff ^ JTT
gR^ 4 fTF^TT t ^ . ? ^ fcTC ^ o T f ^ q^TR 4 m f ^ fSTFTrT ^ETR, fd^iOlt^od
STT^oRT 3TtT chmf-^rl^H, f M ^ g§t oMIMcb ?TFF7cTT, STUTR^ "f^ftf JMd^ydl STIT 3 ^
q^R 3 5 ^ ^ ?^TT Sft^ 3F^ 3T^g5 y ?TR ^T ^CT^ 3 5 ^ gicff 3TtT ^ TfTSfa? ^ T j ^ %
^2T Wftsnff ^ oRRcT FT^.
TTcT^s?ra5tT^fcft ^5ritq^?TR^gTq^RaR^gTFff g ? t w ^ 1 ^ cTSTifq,
;f' mr f^cRw ^ 3Tfera5 ^TF^rrfw #5 fcTC f ^ ^ ^ g t y ^ c ^ ^ ^
^:TF q^r f%aft g^TR qFcTt cfTT ^^rar ^ 4 3-ftT ^frr^oTf^cP f^of t WrftcTRt ^ TRCT
^ ^ , ?n^3Tf%cf5fcR?TRcf5^qR^ ^ t ^ ^ '^ j l f ^ c F R m f . ^ q T 3 ^ T r ^
offt ^ ^ F t ^ •EnfFU oft q^TR 4 ^ ^^TFRT cCTcR TTlJ f^obRHd ^ R ^ ^ t ^IZ #'.
^fe# K ^ -(^(^HH ^
111
PREFACE
The important role played by extension in transferring technologies to farmers has been fairly well acknowledged. Improving its performance continues to be a challenge, though several new approaches to extension delivery were introduced in the past. Keeping in view the emerging challenges before agriculture, India needs a new form of public extension that can respond quickly to the wide range of demands for information, technology and other support needs of its farming community. This would however require considerable institutional reforms in public extension, decentralised planning and implementation, wider funding support, experimentation with innovative funding and delivering mechanisms and partnership with several other extension providers and support organisations.
The last two decades also witnessed an increasing diversity of extension service providers in the private sector. However, efforts should be made to encourage and facilitate more active private sector participation in extension delivery. International experience with implementation of privatisation strategies offers rich lessons on potential ways of shifting to different modes of funding and delivery.
This paper examines various issues related to reforming public extension, promoting private extension initiatives and facilitating public-private partnerships. This paper should be of interest to all those involved in developing new institutional arrangements in extension.
New Delhi Rasheed Sulaiman V
IV
^ •ferfl' ^ 5 ^c^TTR ^
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This paper is the outcome of a review exercise on involvement of private sector in agricultural extension, specifically conducted in response to a request from the Department of Economic Analysis and Research of the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD). I am extremely grateful to Shri. K. V. Raghavulu, Chief General Manager and Dr. T. N. Jha, General Manager, NABARD for providing me this prestigious opportunity and guiding me on the expected output and approach to be employed for doing this assignment. I wish to express my sincere thanks to Professor, Dayanatha Jha, National Professor, NCAP and Dr. Mruthyunjaya, Director, NCAP for their comments on the synopsis and the preliminary draft of this report. I am highly obliged to Dr. S. Selvarajan, Principal Scientist, NCAP for his valuable comments on the revised draft. The contribution of the anonymous referee is also gratefully acknowledged.
New Delhi Rasheed Sulaiman V
LIST OF TABLES
Page No.
Table 1 : State level extension innovations-An analysis 10-13
Table 2 : Broad classification of extension service providers 45
Table 3 : Privatisation models in different countries 51
LIST OF BOXES
Box 1 : Chronic difficulties facing publicly provided extension in remote areas
Key elements of KHDP
ATMA-lessons so far
Central government support to extension in X Plan
Gramin Vikas Trust
Box 2
Box 3
Box 4
Box 5
Box 6
Box?
Box 8
Box 9
Box 10
14
16-17
20
21-22
28-29
30
33
34
38-39
Public-private partnership in agricultural extension in Madhya Pradesh
Agri-business initiatives-lessons so far
Extension by farmer associations-A case of MRDBS
Village knowledge centres in Pondicherry
Rural lending and livelihood promotion -A case of BASIX 40
Box 11 : Examples of services in the public and private interest 47
Box 12 : Eight key lessons on who should finance what in extension 48
Box 13 : Controlled privatisation-possible options 49-50
Box 14 : Public funding and private delivery in Chile 52
Box 15 : NAADS in Uganda 54-55
VI
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
APPRO Action for Food Production
AgREN Agricultural Research and Extension Network
ANGRAU A N G Ranga Agricultural University, Andhra Pradesh
APDDCF Andhra Pradesh Dairy Development Co-operative Federation
ATMA Agricultural Technology Management Agency
BAIF Bharatiya Agro-Industries Federation
BTT Block Technology Team
CD Community Development
CG Commodity Group
DAC Department of Agriculture and Co-operation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India
DANIDA Danish International Development Agency
DoA State Department of Agriculture
DRDA District Rural Development Agency
ECIL Electronic Corporation of India Limited
EIRFP Eastern India Rainfed Farming Project
FAC Farmer Advisory Centre
FAIC Farm Information and Advisory Centre
FIG Farmer Interest Group
GVT Gramin Vikas Trust
HRD Human Resource Development
ICAR Indian Council of Agricultural Research
ICT Information and Communication Technologies
IFFCO Indian Farmers Fertiliser Co-operative Limited
IFIA Indian Farmer and Industries Alliance
ICM Integrated Cotton Management
IGS Indian Grameen Services
INDAP National Institute for Agricultural Development, Chile
IT Information Technology
ITC Indian Tobacco Company
ITD Innovations in Technology Dissemination
ITDC Information Acquisition and Dissemination Centre
KCA Kenya Camel Association
MANAGE National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management, Hyderabad
vn
MRDBS Maharashtra Rajya Draksha Bagaltdar Sangh MSSL Mahindra Shubhlabh Services Limited
MSSRF MS Swaminathan Research Foundation
MKV Mahindra Krishi Vlhar
NAADS National Agricultural Advisory Services, Uganda
NABARD National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development
NAP National Agricultural Policy
NATP National Agricultural Technology Project
NES National Extension Service
NGO Non-Governmental Organisations
KHDP Kerala Horticultural Development Programme
KRIBHCO Krishak Bharati Co-operative
KVK Krishi Vigyan Kendra
ODI Overseas Development Institute, UK
PAIC Punjab Agro-Industries Corporation
PFAE Policy Framework for Agricultural Extension
PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal
PRADAN Professional Assistance for Development Action
PTD Participatory Technology Development
RKK Rallis Kisan Kendra
SAMETI State level Agricultural Management and Extension Training Institute
SAU State Agricultural University
SEWP State Extension Work Plan
SFAC Small Farmers' Agri-business Consortium
SHG Self Help Group
SREP Strategic Research and Extension Plan
T & V Training and Visit System of Extension
TKK Tata Kisan Kendra
UPASI United Planters Association of Southern India
UPDASP Uttar Pradesh Diversified Agricultural Support Project
UPS Uninterrupted Power Supply
UPSLRP Uttar Pradesh Sodic Land Reclamation Project
VEW Village Extension Worker
VFPCK Vegetable and Fruit Promotion Council. Kerala
WIRFP Western India Rainfed Farming Project
ZREAC Zonal Research Extension Advisory Committee
viii
CONTENTS
Page No.
Preface iii
Acknowledgements iv
List of Tables and List of Boxes v
List ojAbbreviations vi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xi
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Extension and agricultural development 1
1.2 Dimensions of agricultural extension 1
1.3 An expanding extension agenda 2
1.4 Declining support for public extension 3
1.5 The Indian context 3
1.6 The purpose 4
1.7 The approach 5
1.8 Outline of the Paper 5
Chapter 2 PUBLIC SECTOR EXTENSION IN INDIA 7
2.1 Evolution of Indian Extension System 7
2.2 Training and Visit (T&V) system 8
2.3 Post T & V public sector innovations 8
2.4 Public sector extension-current status 13
2.5 Recent central government initiatives 18
2.5.1 ITD Component of NATP 19
2.5.2 Agri-clinics and agri-business centres 20
2.6 X Plan initiatives 21
2.7 Public investments in extension 22
2.8 Lessons 23
IX
Chapter 3 PRIVATE SECTOR EXTENSION IN INDIA 27
3.1 Input agency extension 27
3.2 Major agri-business initiatives 31
3.3 Fanner organisations and producer co-operatives 33
3.4 Non-Governmental (voluntary) Organisations (NGOs) 35
3.5 Information Technology and Media 37
3T6 Financial institutions 40
3.7 Consultancy 42
3.8 Agro-processing and trading firms 43
Chapter 4 FUNDING AND DELIVERING EXTENSION: OPTIONS AND EXPERIENCE 45
4.1 Public and private goods 45
4.2 Separating funding from delivery 48
4.3 Privatisation 49
4.4 Privatising extension 50
4.5 International experiences with privatisation of extension 51
4.6 Lessons 57
Chapter 5 CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS 59
5.1 A new and vibrant public sector extension 59
5.2 Promoting private sector involvement 63
5.3 Public-private partnerships 64
5.4 Changing "mindsets" 66
5.5 Financial participation and willingness to pay 67
5.6 Application of information technology 68
5.7 Towards Extension-Plus 69
5.8 Public sector reforms-current status 70
5.9 Implementation realities 70
5.10 Conclusions 72
References 73
Annexure 81
ct)l4Mlc1ct) ^ K
1. TTcT ^ ^?l^ ^ tjt f ^ ^ f^oft ^3r -^ n ?TK (lJcf^(i^H) ^ ^ gcTH 3 5 ^ gioff g t ^ >Murat anf^^g ^3TT # STIT ^ o r f q ^ ?^?TR #5 35TT FTCT fFr^f^
2. TTcT ^ cr?ra5f 4 ^IRcT ^ g FTR ^ ^ ?CT^ 3 5 ^ ^ ^ ^ j ^ ^ ^ ^^s^TT 3ftT
^ o f f ^ « ?r 1^ 3RT f^^FT, 37^^erH #5S 3ftT f5fw f^lW%in?RT ff^fTR i^ 3T?cfrT
3. g5It^ ^^sZTT^ f ^ Uc^Til-yT, f 5 f ^ 3 f t T ^ W ^ ^ ^ 4 CTTT f*^HM1l' ^ T M<W! y
3 f t T 3 T ^ ^ ? T F T ^ r a 5 ^ ^ 5 f ? H g i ^ f . f ^ f ^ ^ T L I c ^ ' R i i l l f , g5cra5-o6|c|>Hm, STrapfT,
^ q W ^ ^ 3 t t T 3 ^ ^ c ^ ^ T c f t ^ ) ^ T c f f g i taf rTFt^^FTt. f%3f t£^?r^^>?TcT/ fat^
gi^cf) ^TT5^ f^g5RT STSrar #?neR 3 ^ ^ ^ ^ T l fMtcTm 3 t ^ 3 T ^ ^ ^ ^
HiAj\< <^cb<. 35T4 ^ 35^xn.
4. ^T-cT^ToT « ^ ^ 3 f t T f ^ t f ^ 3c<JIdchl ( f ^ W ^?iq ^ 51? JJc^ ^ c f f ^^frfT^ 3717^
W r 3TtT f w n R ^ 7 ^ ^ c T g5iT cT?T ^ ? ^ ^ ) ^ 1^T^ 3TtT o r f ^ « ?r ^ ^
F t 3 T c ^ 5 R T K ^ ^ j r 5 H ^ 9 5 ^ . ^ Bt tsf tTf^ef^Scmcff ^ a f ? v ^ ^ ^ g 5 i T i j f t
-^ ^ ^ 3ftT ^ ? f ^ cTCT ^ ^ ^ fcIU r f t ^ f ¥ W ^ 3^^TT 4 cTra5^ f%?t^
5. FTrftf^ CTT^ f¥£rcrt ^ 3q^TT ijgiccH^uf ^ T f r , 73^ 3^lc|^i|cb ^ fe ^ ^
g^^R ^ ^grs f f ^ f^cRUT ^ 3 T f ^ ^TT ft TnOTfT ^ ?t Ff. ? ^ ^^TSTf 4 ^
3T^^ fHHIH. ' ^K Ff •^<M\ f ••-
HCT wc^ gjcff ^ ^a f f%^ ^ ^ 5KT q#j ^ ? ^ qr, STsrar
XI
RSTH ^ 5 ^ ^Tcff ^ ^ q ^ grsS f 3 ^ ^eFram ^ g , f ¥ W g^fH P^ #? fen?
3ftT ST^Pr^^ ^ ^ 3 f f 1^ SnSTfrraJcTT ^ ^ ^ ;[ TP?T fSct 3TT^ rnf fU.
7. f ^ f g ^ rn r ^ O T I ^ 3J ?TR f^c[5cq ^ t cfSTT STFTWt ^ ^
3r5E^ ?^?TK oCfcRSTT 1 ^ ^ g5Ii15t R^TJ, cHHchKl S^fl ^FR^ cTTTrn t . f ¥ lR7 f
R5H35^^ct^ fcb '^H1'^oLlmcb>HEl | i |c^3^ lc | !^ t |chdl3Tf^4etTdH,3F^^TT5^
^ ^ ^ ^ fcb>dHl ^ 1 1 ^ ^ ^^fFRfcn J^ddLI g j ^ attT f%^cT ^ ??mTcT
f ^ ^ ^ U T ^ 5TTcT JI6HlrHch q f ^ ^ ^ chl-^i-cliU ^ f c f ^ F f ^ ^orfFU. c f t ^
f ¥ ^ ;rciH ch<^ , -cfroRT c[5l^^¥rfcRff 3ttT >Meimdl ^ f M ^ H < i oi-lldxHlRlcb M l 4 ^ ^
#5 ^ 2 T ^ f r i cT ^ sCTT ^ t F c R ^^fcTT STRT ^ o S ??1 ) ^ gTSrfrraxTT ^ ^ ^ fcTO
foTcn 3ft^ £^^^ ?rRf q^ fM^er f ^ ^ w r r ^ ^ ^ ( TJ TTT jcMidH sftT g^^f^vj^^, f^^rTR, ^^^ t r y 3ttT pr f^SM, ^ -o l | c i>H | i l 3ttT f ^W^H, ^ 5 ^ cfoT ^ C T ^ 3ft^
^ F ^ 3 ici! iicbdi t . c f t^ f¥ t rat g5T 3q^TT 97T1%CT nr ^ f^rRforfer t g
fF5TraFT35^ .
^ ) ^ a T f ^ , f ^ 3 f t T ^ a T f ^ - 1 % 5 f f >Hl^ciKl c T ^ % ^ f ^ ^ c T R ^ ^
n) ^>cra5 ^TT5^ f w ^ (fcf5^TFr ^ ? ^ fcTTJ STW: ^Wfd f t r 3ft^ TJF^
PT IRff ^ 3Tra??735cn Ftcff # ) .
8. Ct IZ5 ^ ^ 3aTT 3 ? ^ #5 cft^H, •CRlf^ f d W K f ^ d l d ^ l #5 3T^gj ^
^ f e ^ W f ^ 1 m 5 W ? T f e T T T T ^ , t e M ^ f 5 f w f % ^ 7 m ^ f * > H I
^HeUi-ldl y ^ H 35T^ 1^ 3 T ^ ^ 3T^^ ^ m s f f ^ ?TFRT 3 5 ^ ^ qScH # . c T ^ ^
^?TFF7^ Srra^^^xTTO ^ ^ 3 5 ^ ^T?fT TTT^ oTTcn t . •J7Fftl5r^
^ F T 3 f t T f ^ q T 3 T ^ ^ 6 c r H ^ f ^ a T T T F T # . ^ i ^ ^ToTR^jfcTCSTcSt q f rT ,
x i i
oCraFK ^ cTRTT TRTT # 3ftT ^ 3T^ ^ f^^^TR JTSTT ^ ^^sCf EfKT VrFT Ft q m r t . ^fcr?T3tTTTfF5^jh#^ocra^TWq5^'3Tk''tf%W" J ^ ^ f^J^TRt ^ G3 tf5cf cra>Tt^ ' TFracTT RSTR ^ 5 ^ Srf^T^ PMTcft fcjcfir^cl ^ f. fgj^TPTf^STKT^if^^ 3<l^dld1^m3#3ftT3TT^^erR^^^9TTcRT3ff35tSCfR^ ^ ^ ^ |U ^ a T f % ^ ;f?TR , ]Jc^^ TT 4 3Tq^ *l4chdml ^ JHSftecTT f ^ t j f f ^ 3 5 ^ ^irfFU cTSn ^ ^ rRT ^ ^ ^ ^ 1 % f ^ U*! ^ d dcbHl*) WWcTT JTSH ^ 5 ^ 1 ^ fgf^er ?TFTTfTFTt ^ STcH SftT f^^sTcH fent H^Mi^llcil ^ ^ ^3^^\T[\ f ^ Ft ^raxft t . 3^^'^•tJi^ 3fkf^^cTR*l4Hird'!it G^aLlNch ' dlgicJjK ST^TM^JTTCTTT^ 3lli|)la1d oi:rFra5 3 lo lfdcbl R|!^(^t<U|^fHchdch>i3TRt rnfFU.
9. ^ o T f ^ fft?r #5 g^?7R H<^<\ sforrr ^ Ft ^ J T ^ 3 5 ^ ^ ^ # . crenf^, RlWiRd 9jJwg5t37^gp^^fcTOMI({H<f^^3JRf gyRT31lc|!^i|*t. >9lcJcHpHct)
5RTR^tiRf ^ ^ r a ^ cr^^^;gtTRfcrta^r >iw\UH ^3RTinfFG. f^oft^Fc^ rfrcT f t f ^ ? 5K t : ^ t ^ 3ftT srrat JT^ ^ 0 ^ ^ ?g itT, 5f
3ft^f^;[^jRfM^ct^TR35^M3^>H^5ddl%^)RUlt^•Rl^^rlf^u| gy?^, ^?^?r ^M ^ ^5f4 g 5 ^ ^ fcTFTfT 3ft7 3RT Ucrlf^tlf ^^ fg^^^M ^ F t ^ , cTm JcMIdH
S^oTfe 3ftT inFcl5 ^ f e ^ ^JTO ^ E R 3q^TT % fcTO g f ^ qr f j ^
^ t p f 3 f t T 3 H ^ ^ 5 T T 3 5 ^ ^ 3 R R c T # . ? ^ ^ , ^ H I ^ > I U | STt^qc f t^
^ ^^ftjcT ^ftfcRTf, *|ifpHtMlciH 3Tra5fR STIT ^^^^^^TT, CT9TT ^ ^ ^mU TTfrTcT f .
^J|6HlcHch ^ ^ ? ^ ^ ^?) oR^ Jl>!?)<d # foRT^ ^Jltf g 5 ^ #jfcTG cRtcpf
#5 fcTO 5I TRT i ^ 3ftT f^RrR" f l l SM ^gf¥?^JcT Ft ^ . STTTcTT f ^ W ^ ; 5 t
cbl^^^l ^ ^ ^ fcTO ^W^ ?tq ^ WnnR ^ S ^ d M d #.
10. ^j^Hlii^?^^Tgmmf^iJT^^o[ra^jgTnfcm^ ^ f ^ erTTcTT ^ S'WtTT ^ 5 ^ ^ rft<T WdTldl 3 tk dlddlLj^ 3 jm|^ -^ j ^ F t ^
^nfFG. f j r^3f tT3^^5RTR^^cr i3 f t^ fd^ '^c t )> iU|^^oL|c |> i4 i | | H d c i l l c h ^
^ jnF^# j fcTU3Tf^ far fTt^RFt3TTcf t# . c ^ f e r f t M ^ d gtinc^ ^ grTTcTT jt
^ . 3T^^eTR3ftTRflT5M5T^mcft^fcTI?f^fc^feTg5tTraT^cTg5^^^
xiil
^ . ^?JRt^ R^TTfH glcT fdW^ciK ^ ^U ^f^fRt^ Tj : T5?t ^ 3 c ^ f w
11. 3 Acbcll(it y>Hi< ciidici>iui Tty^HKyidtiH g5T3 y<: c ^ sftr J^c icw s i t e i t e TTFc^^ FtcTT 3TT ^ ^ t . f ^ TcT qT CTR fcfU ^ f ^ ^ H 3rm ^ ^v^cH t
^ j te r srar 5 ^ ^ OT'?;^ t foRf^ #TTT TT Ttmsft ^ trfencR Ft slk ^sr Ft JRTR^?mT3Tr^cl-cjlfc1<i1 ^ ST^Srac^ SttT^c^JcW ^ Ft ^ . f M ^ ^ ? ^ ^ c ^
^ • TF^TT ^ 5RTR y ic l t lHl % S T ^ H ^ ^ 3tt^ iJc^ichH ^ ^ g^tllHlcbl ^ ' T^TT^
12. H^^nryiclt lH (VR^Ft c ^ ^ ? c R ^ F t ) ^ T r T F ^ ^ f ^ a f r ^ ^ ? l F ^ n f ^ ^ ^
c ^ ^ F t ^ f . f ^ 3 T F T c f t T q T [ d W ^ c i l < t 3 T T c ? r t 3 f t T ^ ^ 3 r f ^ H ^
FtoTlcTtf. cT2Trfq,fa1«^cil<l ^ 3Tflrai3ra5T JL|i|lJlchd[ Sftf^y-^i^H Ft ?ra5cTT t ,
oT fgj jMiilMcbdfsft g5T ^grarf g t d-cufdet 3ft^ a f t fe^ q r f ^ ^ M Ft 3ft^ 3 ^ jRRrT^^q^^^^^cTFTTTT^Ft. "WT 55H 3 5 ^ w f ^ ^ ^ # ^ W 5tc[FT ^ 5 ^ ^ ^ mst F t ^ cnfFTJ oft sq^Traxrf ^ 3Tra ?7g5cn ^ m 3Rtcft^ Ft m^^ ^ HdDKIC'Hch y v n ^ ^ ^ ^ i^ TTF^"^ fefT oTHT ^EnfFH. Wft
^^s!TT ^ fjcra^ cR f^^cTT3ft ^ qit 05 ^T\ ^ ^TTcTH ^ ^ ^^^H f oft ^ c t t ^
q^rfcrat wc ^<\^^\ t^ f 3ftT ;rf^5M JRI i^ ^TJ^FT ^ 5 ^ f .
13. f ^ c t ? t ^ ^ T F ^ 1 l f W T 3 o t ^ g f ¥ ? E J c T g 5 ^ ^ ^ c T f t % f . q ? t c ^ f ^ ^
d) l4*M ^ # ^grSTt ^ f c T C # d ^TTcTH^^RRT ^ U ^ f ^ ^ x ^ t . ? ^ 5T^5R^ RceTgT
j IF t ^ 5 ^ c|5t ^ F t 4 ^ g n i y cTH ^ J H ^fTWt Ft , ^FT f ^oT t ^ fTF TTfrTcTT 3Tflra5
ocraFt Ft oTicft t , ^^rtfe ^ # f erfcT gfcT s: f f^ cTRcT ^5fr Ftcft t . SFCT
SWc rST c R t ^ i=t c^^ ^ ^ c f t 3ftT ^ocra5 T T 5 ^ g t fS^rai ffcTPCfcTT 3t?T?FT
^ i^llfHd # . ^ ^ 5 W ^ 3 t ! ^ l c i H l ^ 3 q ^ T T f g c c f t ^ y ? T R * l 4 d 5 d l M l #5fcTO"feTT
3TT^?raxrT#. 3TH: 5craj ^ T [ 5 ^ f ^^5 [^ q ^ 3Tflr^ eZTR f ^ 3TT^ ^cnf^
14. W^^ ^ ^ , STESt cRF 5Tf fifTcT Stt^ 3TTcTTf ?gr?T ^ ^ M ;T ?TRg5 oft
^T tn r ^^ t ^ 5 r 5 R ^ 5 ^ ^ f ^ c ^ F t , ^ I ? ^ 3 R T ' ? T T R ^ ^ t . 1 R ^ Ji i fHif i ^ M
XIV
^ ^ f . ^ ^3HT ^ Wi ^ n r 3ftT ^WSJ f ^ JRTR STciMchdM ^ ^ S!7T ^ ^
4^STi l1 j |c iHfe fT t .
cfo sf?T ^ ^?iq T=t r r a 5 ^ ^ L|<iJ-i! fT ^cmz j^cTser cb^irfl f . 3T^farTrr ^crrfcrct #5 JcMIdH ^ ^f^rf^TIrr 5T= ^ fcTU ^^ ^^ cpHcbi ^ ch4rJKl/ S % « f ^??J^ 3^c7^T ch^ldl f cTSTT id^IdH ^ ^cof fT^ 3-ftT TTPTT #5 STTCTK q ^ ^^R5 ^ c h J - f l s ^ H ^ ^ T T r r R ^ y ^ f . -^T^ ^ ^ ^c f t cCra fSJT ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ STgcCraT ?rtT
16. <\<(i>\<] ;f ?TR ii\\^<\ ^J^nSH^ 7T gT3Tf #jfcTO3Ttf^lch dMId ^ ^ c f t
^ Ff 3r?rat ^ ^ ^ ' f t ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ gs cTT Ft.
7T) f M l T q c l H c t ) < ^ 3 T t T 5 r ? T R ^ ^ 5 ^ % f M ^ c R t ^ ^ ^ 2 T 3 R R f ^ ^
ET) ^ 'i^cbellc^^ (>llcHHlfd$l, Hl*xl!ill^1, y>HK >W,IM>, ^5^35,'PratiJ'HK > c|l
jTSFT ^ 5 ^ ^Tcft) g t Rii^cim # r r a s T 3 ^ a^l!^i*la^l gsr PICIKUI g , ^ ^ .
1. y^nT-x?RT:f^^tTTf^*3fW37^35^%fcTO^3ff^q^^ 5^5^-fenaTFfT^cTTfFl?. ^^^513T§f ^3n f ^ Sq^^fT sf^T TT?T jnTfrfrrat #j q^?M#J37frTf^^^^5Era#^fcnj fWHcT^qfr I , ST^^efH, M<IH! L 5fiUT, iJc^T^tf^ Sra^R, SHEfR^cT e m ? , ^5Rt^R fW?T ^ ^ 3TTf 4 ?TFracTT
2. 4l(jH<(^IM:3RT^^TTo:Tqi^^qF^n^35^3ftTfM^^?^^f¥tl5Tc^
XV
3. f^foft y^TR g j ^ g>T ^gef^ : s r ^ ^ ciidM<ui ^ f ^ u r , f ^ ^^ ^
TjufcT: ^TCT f ^ 5T?TR STciH^dfsff % fe: ^ ^ o H STIT ^ ^ f f ^ ^
^ ^^cHT 3ftT $TH ^ 3Tr5H-5r^rH FtcIT ^ T H s i t^ fTH cTSTT ^^EHT ^ f M ^
6 . f cJ^ ' ^dJ^u i s f t T ^ R t l l c H l c H * WI t lodd l : ^ ^ t n t #3 3 R Sft^ S^WtTT
7 . ?Tra^ : JT^TR cfT u f c T ^ ^ ^ ^ R^Tl f^ ^ 5 ^ ^ ^ o T f ^ S T % ?TRR
J llfHcl f .
8. W'ttjjfclch q f t gc f ^ : ^ 3 T t e ! J ^ ? T R ^ oqfM^JIiHIcHch >H>h^ofcT^ ^TTTSff
9 . • i T R g ? T f ^ : f M ^ £ r g ^ ? M g T c ^ f M w f # J I 7 3 5 ^ T l j q ^ f o 7 r r T 3 T t T ^ ^ ^
^?Rf q r ^ ^ ^ 3THT t faH#5 ^RT STc^ ^777 STO5 cpt ^frTcT ^ sETT SftT
10. - ^ e n f M ^ a sff ^ gwr : ^ m W ^ 3ftT ^T-CRTJT % afr e r ^w c R F ^ ^ a T R ^ ^ t ^ # 3 ^ f c T O f ^ q ? ^ ? T R ^ ^ T 3 f f # 5 c h l ' ! > l f ' C J i | H ^ g
3tflra)cft^f¥lr.
1 1 . ' t ^ * ^ 1 c r S ' r f % ^ 8 J ^ f r a i 2 r : f M ^ ' ^ c h e l 1 c r S ' i i # 5 ^ 2 T ^ f r a K ^ ^ ^ ^ ' ^ M I d
1 2 . ^^«nTRTfcJ!icit|U| : - M M i d d l ^ f ^ T z t f ^ ^ R ^ ^ - d l H I ^ " te t cT c m ^ R ^
XVI
13. g^TR#)fcTC^^f^f%flr:f¥tr^5ri£rfTra5 3 t ^ ^ ^ f ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ e r T F t ^
^TT3^ f gjRT nfTTcT f .
15. 3 r j y ^ H STIT ^ ^ C ^ ^ R : >H>(*|>ri 3ftT f^Toft g^?TR TTfcTfMW #) iJ^c^ichH
3ftT 3 r 5 ? ^ ^ clot ^?TF lTfTTcTTfMlr ^ fdchRld S U T c^f^ iCrT oTHT.
5F icn^31 lcH^ i |c t3d l^MelT jH3t t^ 'Me; | i |d l ^T ju |c |cd l^ iJ^c^ ic }5H^^^^
17 . TTPra^WeRf^gn^ :JHHc |>H>Hl tR [d*m* l4 f t5H^3 t^^^^cb l4c j5d f3T f
eldclHI, ^HI^ciKl fdct^r^d ^ 5 ^ ^ Sft^ ^f^x^ >HI^(iKl ^ # ^ , ^ ^ ?SmTcT
g ) foTcTT 3 l k 0:11* W>( UcK^i^H ?Cm>- R i^ i l< f d P i i l laH UcK^i^H chl4fMl'
^c}) i4t j6n 3tk J^ciiidH, f *^M HJI6 [^cbm, >{ii cii<) m^. ^^ i<1
^ ) f Toft u^^^^T^ 5fr^5T- 3Tra^ raxn 3TTenf sitT STC^ ^TJCTH ^m\ i\m\i, o^(ii\\u sft^ oi iidxHifilch ^ M f ^ ^ f ^ d gs^^.
3ltT^?TF^TT^U3^^«Hel|i ldl^^3TtTT];u|c|(ndl >H£i|ildl ^ ^ c ^ J c b H .
18 . g ^ e R ^ f ^ g c f ^ q ^ f f c T ^ f t ^ f ^ t l M H c h f i U H I :^qTf tTT3f tT fc ld<u i g UTTcff
ct^fK gy^T 3ftT 5I?TRR cTSTT ^J|6Hlc^ch ^JrcR ^ ^#f l j?T ^ ^ iT^lcff ^
xvll
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The last two decades witnessed declining support for public extension and emergence of a wide range of extension service providers in the private sector all over the world. This paper examines the implications of these changes for Indian agriculture, keeping in view the emerging challenges, and discusses potential options for strengthening public sector extension and promoting private initiatives and public-private partnerships in extension.
2. The number and types of organisations providing extension services in India have shown an increase during the last two decades. In terms of number of staff and organisational reach, the public sector state Department of Agriculture (DoA) continues to dominate extension provision. Other line departments, research centres and agricultural universities in the public sector play only a very limited role in extension.
3. A large number of private agencies provide advisory and other support service to farmers engaged in agriculture and allied sectors. These include: input agencies, farmer organisations, producer cooperatives, agro-processing companies, agri-marketing firms, NGOs, agri-business houses , individual consultants , consultancy firms, financial institutions, media and internet services. However, the presence of these private extension providers is generally skewed towards well-endowed regions and high value crops. Crop/commodity focussed extension of private sector though very useful, is narrow in one sense as they do not engage with other related issues such as farmer organisation-development or those issues related to sustainability of resource use.
4. Remote areas and poor producers (especially those growing low value crops and having little marketable surplus) are poorly served by both private as well as public sector extension. They rarely meet the needs of small and poor producers who need a broader kind of support to improve their livelihoods. Special efforts to target these areas and groups have to be planned by deploying public funds.
5. While public funding would remain important, the delivery of all kinds of services need not necessarily be though the public sector. Several of these services could be either:
a. contracted by the public sector to other private extension providers such as NGOs and private consultancy firms for delivering specific services in select regions and client groups or
b. jointly funded and implemented by public and private agencies
xix
6. Public funds also could be utilised to fund farmer organisations to help them contract services from other service providers including public sector. However, efforts should be made to strengthen the capacity of fEirmer organisations to prioritise, demand, contract and monitor services.
7. Private extension is not a substitute for public extension and there is a need for significant public funding for extension in the years to come. Building a reasonably good extension system takes time and much experimentation and learning. However, funding should be linked to: identification of broader support requirements of farmers; delivery of integrated support to farmers in partnership with other organisations; and implementation of organisational changes informed by a detailed institutional analysis. There is a need for a core group of extension professionals/specialists with diverse expertise (crop production and processing; extension, communication and training; agri-business and marketing; farmer mobilisation cind farmer organisational development, credit) at the district and regional levels to prioritise public funding, plan strategies and support limited number of better qualified field staff with specific professional guidance. Public funding could be potentially used for:
a. re-designing existing public sector organisations to perform new roles
b. initiate and nurture new models of extension in the public, private and public-private partnership mode and
c. farmer organisation development (forming, strengthening and networking farmer organisations). This often requires long term and intensive efforts.
8. Though several new approaches to extension delivery were tried during the post T&V period, the DoA still face several constraints in provid ing adequa te extension su ppo r t to fa rmers . Technology dissemination continues to be understood as the main extension role and other support needs of farmers, that became important in the last one decade, remain unattended. These include: improved access to markets, research, advice, credit, infrastructure, farmer organisation development and business development services. There is an increasing realisation at the policy level that extension need to play an expanded role. But this approach, "extension-plus", has been put in practice in only in a few of the external aided agricultural development programmes such as KHDP and DASP and have not yet become a part of mainstream extension practice. Agri-business firms such as Rallis and Mahindra
XX
and financial institutions like BASIX have innovated mechanisms to provide integrated technical support to farmers. Public extension should prioritise its activities in each region keeping in view the constraints and potentials in improving income of farmers and how effectively it could tap the skills and expertise of the diverse players for providing an integrated technical support. Research and Extension strategies should emerge out of a broader livelihood analysis organised through a wider consultative exercise.
9. Public sector extension has a legacy of working in isolation. But, working in partnership is essential to play this expanded role. The organisational culture prevailing in the public sector constrain adoption of these strategies and extension reforms should first address these issues. These include: rigid hierarchy and centralised modes of planning; a tradition of assessing performance in terms of technology adoption; a history of rewarding only success and thus a reluctance to report and analyse reasons of failure; a history of working independently and a mistrust of other agencies; and a tradition of up-ward accountability for resource utilisation rather than output achievement and client satisfaction. A number of issues related to governance of public sector plague the functioning of public extension services and these need review. These include: policies related to recruitment; transfer and promotions; performance assessment; incentives and rewards; and contractual services. Building close working relationships with others require inculcation of right attitude. There is a need to introduce a new organisational culture that ensures trying new ways of doing things and continuous learning. Capacity building programmes have to explicitly address these issues.
10. Apart from capacity to innovate new arrangements at the local level, the staff should also have sufficient freedom and flexibility to use this capacity. Decentralisation of extension services to district and down below tends to make it more accountable and relevant to immediate client needs. But sufficient attention needs to be given to improve the capacity of the decentralised system to:
a. manage extension at the local level,
b. strengthening its links to research and training systems,
c. negotiate successfully between demands of short term tangible benefits with those having a long term less tangible perspectives such as conserving environment and
xxi
d. steer extension without getting entangled with local power groupings, but at the same time remaining accountable to the local administration.
11. Monitoring and evaluation of extension provision is becoming more important in a pluralistic extension environment. Irrespective of who delivers, the government need to play a more effective role in setting up a credible regulatory framework within which services operate and also to monitor and evaluate the quality of extension provision. Monitoring and evaluation of extension provision, in participation with different stakeholders, should also focus on potential impact of newly introduced technologies, sustainable natural resource use, environmental and public health impact and conduct of transparent business practices.
12. Financial participation of clients in extension provision (even if small In scale) has a lot of advantages. This often leads to accountability and more efficient delivery of services. However accountability can lead to better user orientation if users are able to check on the quality and appropriateness of services and can articulate their needs. The service provider must also be able to deliver services that respond to user needs and really feel the negative effects of user dissatisfaction. A large number of farmers are willing to pay for field visit of experts to advise on farming practices and for participation in training programmes. Quite often unwillingness to pay is related to the users' inability to understand the benefits of a particular service.
13. There are a number of ways to ensure financial participation. Direct payment for services such as field visits or training programmes is one option. This kind of direct financial participation is likely to exclude the poorer segments of the population. In such cases, financial participation is more feasible when services can be provided to groups of farmers as the cost per individual is less. Other Indirect methods include collection of levies and m e m b e r s h i p con t r ibu t ion of fa rmers to farmer organisations. These farmer contributions could be used to finance extension activities. Farmer organisation development should thus receive greater attention.
14. Lack of competent, well trained and self confident extensionists willing to offer pay worthy services has been another problem. The ongoing scheme of establishing agri-clinics and agri-business schemes by private entrepreneurs is specifically addressing this problem. This scheme has contributed to increasing the number of qualified and competent private extension providers.
xxi i
15. Agri-business firms engaged in processing and exports provide technical consultancy to farmers as part of a wide range of services. Some firms employ or contract staff to provide technical support to farmers to ensure production of produce of needed quality and the staff is paid a commission based on quality and quantity of produce procured. Farmers indirectly pay for these services in all contract-farming arrangements.
16. Partial cost recovery for services offered by the government extension machinery has been tried. But this should be treated more as an accountability enhancing mechanism and not as a major source of funding for extension. But measures to recover at least the recurring cost of providing these services should be explored.
17. Shifting to different modes of funding and delivery needs a carefully thought about change management process. The process should depend on:
a. a clear articulation of the role of extension in the Indian context irrespective of who deliver it,
b. an analysis of the roles performed and areas operated by diverse extension agencies,
c. an analysis of international experience with different modes of funding and delivery of extension and
d. taking all stakeholders (politicians, bureaucrats, extension staff, farmers, private extension service providers) into confidence and sincerely addressing their fears.
WAYS FORWARD
1. Extension-Plus: Reorganisation of public extension organisations to play an expanded role. This means helping farmers to access markets, research advice, credit, value addition opportunities, infrastructure, business development services, etc., in addition to dissemination of useful and relevant technology.
2. Partnerships: Public extension to identify other potential partners and develop joint proposals with varying levels of funding and delivery of services.
3. Promoting private extension initiatives: Creation of an enabling environment, review of rules and regulations adversely affecting private sector entry, state support for creation of a cadre of well-qualified private extension providers and contracting select services to private sector.
xxi i i
4. Facilitation: Extension to play a major facilitating role, facilitating information and knowledge flow across different agencies and acting as a bridging organisation linking different pieces of knowledge and information.
5. O & M Review: Organisational, management and financial review of public extension to facilitate better organisational design and improved financial management.
6. Decentralisation and operational autonomy: Decentralisation of extension planning and management to district and block levels with sufficient flexibility and freedom to generate and use resources.
7. Governance: Address issues related to public sector governance affecting extension. These include: rules and conventions related to recruitment, qualifications, transfer, contractual appointment, fund utilisation, performance assessment, etc.
8. Cultural change: Extension reforms to address the limitations of the prevailing organisational culture in public extension, namely, rigid hierarchy, centralised modes of planning, reluctance to report fai lures and analysing them, m i s t r u s t of o ther agencies, accountability for resource utilisation than output achievement and client satisfaction. A new culture of experimentation, reflection and learning need to be inculcated in public sector extension organisations.
9. Manpower: A core group of specialists with diverse skills to be placed at the district £ind regional levels, supported by limited number of better-qualified staff provided with adequate operational funds.
10. Extension for dis-advantaged regions: Enhanced public funding for implementation of special extension programmes for disadvantaged and remote areas that are weakly integrated with markets.
11 . Interface with stakeholders: Institutionalise mechanisms to promote interface with various stakeholders and ensure better client participation in selection, implementation and evaluation of programmes.
12. Institutional analysis: Special attention for institutional analysis of earlier programmes to draw out generic principles that govern success . These principles need to be widely promoted for experimentation and adaptation, instead of expanding any model across all situations.
XXIV
13. Enhanced funding for extension: Funding to be primarily targeted to facilitate change. These include: better organisational redesign; initiate and nurture new models of extension delivery; HRD activities of all extension actors; and farmer organisation development.
14. Financial participation: Financial participation primarily to cover operational expenditure and enhance accountability to clients. Promote development of quality services that are potentially pay-worthy.
15. M and E: Participatory mechanisms to monitor and evaluate public and private extension activities to be developed and adopted.
16. Farmer Organisation Development: Developing strong, articulate and viable farmer organisations to be a priority for public extension. Public funds to farmer organisations to help them access extension services. The capacity of farmer organisations to identify needs and evaluate quality of assistance to be strengthened.
17. HRD: Human Resource Development programmes to focus on improving the capability of all actors to work as a system. General HRD needs include: changing landscape of extension; developing partnerships and lessons from successful partnerships; how to innovate new institutional arrangements, learning skills and how to learn better, etc. Specific HRD needs include:
a. District and Block level extension staff- decentralised planning, implementation and evaluation of extension programmes, farmer organisation development, working in partnerships, contracting services, strengthening links to training and research systems,
b. Private extension providers- developing need-based and pay-worthy services, entrepreneurial and business skills,
c. Farmer organisations- identifying extension and support needs, accessing services and support, contracting assistance and evaluating quality of assistance
18. Facilitate change management process: Experimenting with new funding and delivery mechanisms and explicitly addressing issues related with governance and organisational culture by taking all stakeholders into confidence, addressing their fears and learning together from new initiatives.
XXV
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Extension and agricultural development
Agricultural Extension as a profession owes its origin to man's quest for improving agriculture. The idea has been to introduce new practices and inputs to protect his crop from pest and diseases, obtain better yields and meet specific quality. The need for "transferring" the accumulated body of knowledge generated in experimental stations to large number of producers spread over a wider geographical area led to the emergence of an organised extension service. "In the early years of the twentieth century, they were organised predominantly by either central or local governments, or by agricultural colleges in close association with experiment stations or by farmer organisat ions (agricultural societies, co-operatives, farmers unions, or chambers of agriculture) or combination of these parent bodies" (Garforth and Jones, 1997). Over the years, several changes happened. Because of its valuable contribution to agricultural development, extension services became a public sector responsibility (funded, managed and delivered by public sector) all over the world. Past investments in extension have yielded high economic rates of return and are seen as one reason for good global performance in food production. (Alex, et al 2002). However, the public sector monopoly came under increasing threat in the 1980s as many donors, extension professionals, politicians and bureaucrats started questioning the desirability of this situation on economic and efficiency grounds.
1.2 Dimensions of agricultural extension
There is no single accepted definition of extension and its definitions have been changing depending on the development goals set by each country, its stage of agricultural development and socio-economic characteristics of potential clients. Coutts (1995) noted that definitions of extension range from a persuasive technology transfer (Roling, 1988) model to that of a facilitative human development model (van den Ban and Hawkins, 1998, Bloom, 1991). Between these extremes lie other models including that of extension as an advisory/consultancy (or problem solving) function and extension as adult education. During the last decade, the extension literature has been notable for holistic ideas
1
such as the Agricultural Knowledge and Information System (Roling, 1990). This recognises a wider set of information sources and the value of creating systems that assist in the generation and dissemination of knowledge, especially in the context of sustainable agriculture and progress towards an ecological knowledge systems (Roling and Wagemakers, 1998). More recently the notion of extension as part of a wider system has emerged. For example the "interdependence model" (Bennet, 1992) and the innovation system framework (Lundvall, 1992) offer more inclusive way of thinking about the actors and the institutional context in which the generation, diffusion and use of new knowledge takes place. This system of actors and process not only includes research and extension, but also technology users and supportive structures such as markets and credit.
1.3 An expanding extension agenda
Many extension organisations have a narrow view of extension and they see it as a process of supplying information to farmers on demand, and of introducing technical changes in agriculture, which they consider to be desirable, rather than one of promoting farmers' development and independence (van den Ban and Hawkins, 1998). But the role of extension is much wider as extension needs to teach farmers management and decision making skills, help rural people develop leadership and organisational skills enabling them to organise better, operate and or participate in co-operative credit societies and other support organisations, as well as to participate more fully in the development of their local communities (Swanson and Clarr, 1984). Over the last decade, there has been an increasing realisation of the impor tance of t a sks such as community mobil isat ion, conflict management, problem solving, education and human development and the need for extension staff to acquire social science skills to perform these tasks (van Beek, 1997; Farrington et al, 1998; Sulaiman and van den Ban, 2000). Apart from advice and information on production technologies, farmers need a wide range of services, with improved access to markets, research, credit, infrastructure and business development services, and extension has to engage with these emerging demands (Sulaiman and Hall, 2002, Katz, 2002). "Extension is being forced to embrace a broadened mandate or reaffirm a broad mandate that has long existed. International organisations are shifting from an agricultural to a rural focus in programmes, recognising that agricultural productivity may not always be the best way to improve rural livelihoods. A broader
rural livelihoods approach requires extension services to deliver information on: local organisation development, micro-enterprises, environmental issues, rural infrastructure, social programmes, rural health and education, and other non-agricultural issues" (Alex et al, 2002).
1.4 Declining support for public extension
Though returns to investment in extension were found reasonable and perhaps comparable to those on other public services (Gill, 1991), the increasing restraints on government finances and reduced donor interest have led to significant cuts in public extension services. Public extension services are under pressure for their own poor performance and are often criticised for being: inefficient and ineffective; lacking clear objectives, motivation and incentives; being poorly managed and not accountable to clients; and lacking in relevant technologies (Haug, 1999). Limited operational budgets, perennial vacancies in remote and inaccessible areas and its narrow focus on technology dissemination have also led to erosion of credibility of public extension.
Emergence of new extension arrangements offered by the private and voluntary sectors (e.g., input companies, NGOs, farmer associations, producer co-operatives, media, agro-processing firms, consultants, etc) have further accelerated the process of limiting the role of government in extension. Decentralization, costs sharing, cost recovery, withdrawal from select services, and contracting are some of the options exercised by various governments. In many countries, there often is a broad range of providers (public, semi-public and different forms of private sector) of agricultural advice and a clear role exists for each of them to address the varied needs of farmers.
1.5 The Indian context
Like many other developing countries, the extension services in India have been publicly funded and delivered through a separate agency, mainly the Department of Agriculture (DoA) of respective states and union territories. Although several new agencies in the public and private sector have emerged to provide extension and other services to farmers, the DoA continues to dominate extension in terms of staff number and organisational reach. By way of infrastructure and manpower, the DoA has a presence all over the country, though its intensity in terms of manpower and expenditure varies widely across states.
A decade after the end of the Training and Visit (T & V) System, the DoA is struggling to find a fresh direction and approach. At the same time, the nature of Indian agriculture becomes ever more complex. New opportunities (and threats) for trade in international markets join older concerns of supporting the rural economy where agricultural production and employment support the livelihoods of many of the poorest in society. The private sector involvement in provision of extension increased considerably in the last two decades. However, its presence is still restricted to few crops and geographical regions. Several new private sector initiatives have come up in recent years.
There is an increasing realisation that public extension by itself cannot meet the specific needs of various regions and different classes of farmers. The draft "Policy Framework for Agricultural Extension"(PFAE) of the Ministry of Agriculture affirms that the "policy environment will p r o m o t e pr iva te and communi ty dr iven extens ion to opera te competitively, in roles that complement , supplement , work in partnerships and even substitute for public extension" (DAC, 2000). A search for alternative funding and delivering mechanisms is currently on and its operational success would depend on:
a. the emergence of private extension service providers and their expertise and willingness to provide quality services needed by farmers,
b. the ability and willingness of farmers to contribute at least partially to the cost of extension provision,
c. evolution of a vibrant public sector extension organisation with adequate capacity to partner with, monitor and regulate private extension initiatives,
d. the emergence of capable farmer organisations that can demand needed services and negotiate contracts with public and private sector extension and
e. the capability of the central and state governments in implementing a carefully thought about and widely consulted change management process.
1.6 The purpose
The purpose of this paper has been primarily to take a critical look at the emerging private sector participation in agricultural extension in
India and to suggest strategies for developing a better extension system, building on the strengths of both public and private sector. The paper examines the post Training and Visit (T & V) innovations in public sector extension and also international experiences with privatisation of extension services. Implications of these developments on future funding and delivery of agricultural extension in India are discussed and specific suggestions to improve the performance of a pluralistic extension system are indicated.
1.7 The approach
The findings of this paper are primarily based on a review of published literature available on this theme. These include, policy papers, research repor ts , journal articles, seminar proceedings, internet sources , administrative guidelines and monitoring and evaluation reports. This document also benefited greatly from the e-mail discussion on "Prospects and Limitations of Private Extension Delivery" hosted by Agricultural Research and Extension Network (AgREN) of the Overseas Development Institute (ODI), UK. These are supplemented with author's first hand personal experience gained from numerous field visits to public and private extension organisations in India.
1.8 Outline of the paper
The next chapter (Chapter 2) provides an overview of the public sector extension system in India. A brief description of its evolution, the post Training and Visit Innovations, current central government thinking on extension are also provided in this chapter. Chapter 3 discusses the nature and extent of private sector involvement in agricultural extension in India. Conceptual considerations that help in deciding various funding and delivery options and international experience with privatisation of extension services are synthesised in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 discusses the conclusions and policy implications emerging out of this study.
CHAPTER 2
PUBLIC SECTOR EXTENSION IN INDIA
2.1 Evolution of Indian extension system
Organized attempts to establish extension services in all the development blocks started after the country became independent in 1947. Pre-independent efforts had been largely local attempts, driven mainly by humanitarian ideas of a few individuals and organizations. These efforts had only limited impact and were restricted to areas where these programmes were implemented. Independent India acknowledged the relevance of extension quite early, a decade earlier than organized attempts to strengthen agricultural research was initiated in the country. External aid for agricultural development emphasized extension in the 1950s. The two important programmes, the Community Development (CD) and the National Extension Service (NES) had been clear examples of the government's commitment to provide a number of services in areas such as agriculture, health, animal husbandry and education to all sections of the society. With little progress on the agricultural front, the need for providing special attention to agriculture was realized and since the 60s, many new programmes for raising agricultural production were initiated in the country.
Until the 1960s, agricultural extension was purely a function performed under the guidance of the state Department of Agriculture (DoA). A few voluntary organizations were also doing effective agricultural development work in their limited areas of jurisdiction. The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) started getting involved in extension activities in 1966 with the National Demonstration programmes. ICAR's involvement increased considerably, with the initiation and spread of Krishi Vigyan Kendras (F£irm Science Centers). ICAR also initiated programmes such as the Lab to Land programmes and the Operational Research programmes which were subsequently merged with the KVKs in the 90s.
Establishment of radio stations and initiation of rural programmes resulted in wider use of mass media for agricultural development. The print media followed suit. State Agricultural Universities (SAUs) initiated
training programmes (for officials and farmers), demonstrations, and exhibi t ions and these p r o g r a m m e s got s t reng thened with the establishment of a Directorate of Extension in each SAU. Organizations created for promotion of specific commodities (Commodity Boards) and specific areas (Command Area Development Authority) also initiated extension activities. Extension was treated essentially as a public good, and with only public sector in the fray for technology development and transfer, the focus was on spreading the reach of extension to all parts of the country through more extension staff and a large number of programmes.
2.2 Training and Visit (T & V) system
The 1980s saw most of the states embracing the World Bank funded T & V system of extension. T & V improved the funding and human resource intensity of extension and brought a unified command for extension. The "straitjacket" approach of T & V, ignoring the wide variations in agro-climatic and socio-economic conditions, gave mixed results. In retrospect, it is now widely acknowledged that T & V had a mixed impact and it did help improve yields of cereals in irrigated regions, but failed to make any serious impact in rainfed areas that constitute 70% of the net cropped area (ICAR, 1998). The need for a proper analysis of institutional and socio-economic factors in rainfed areas and the importance of varied social science skills among extension staff for making relevant interventions was also highlighted (Farrington et al, 1998). Since the 1980s, more NGOs, agro-input industries, and agro-processors started taking up agricultural extension activities. Farmer associations and producer co-operatives are also presently involved in extension services in select crops and commodities. A large number of extension services are being provided by input companies, especially fertilizer companies. With an increase in rural literacy, newspapers are devoting more space for reports related to agriculture (cultivation practices, new technologies, development projects, etc.). State owned and private local language TV channels are also telecasting special agricultural programmes of 30 minutes duration, at least five days a week.
2.3 Post T & V public sector innovations
With external support drying up, the states started to downplay the rigour of T & V approach and the 90s saw many states making
innovations in extension delivery. These innovations emerged to address the limitations of the T & V approach, the reduced funding available for extension and also in response to the changing national and state level priorities. Broadbasing extension (to include messages related to horticultural and livestock sectors) was one of the immediate response. However the performance on broadbasing has been highly uneven as the DoA has no administrative control on personnel of different line d e p a r t m e n t s . Hor t i cu l tu re , Soil Conserva t ion and Watershed Development wings of the DoA became separate departments or a separate directorate in many states. States such as Maharashtra subsequently merged these separate departments to provide a single window system delivery. Other major innovations include :
a. adoption of group approach (instead of the earlier individual approach),
b. setting up more contact centres below block level,
c. expanding the reach of farmer training (adding more training centres),
d. p romot ion of pr ivate extension ini t ia t ives ( inc luding contracting extension to private extension agencies),
e. use of para extension workers as substitutes for DoA field extension workers and also to increase the reach of the public sector extension system,
f. designing new programmes for women in agriculture,
g. more active extension role by SAUs (setting up mult i-disciplinary SAU teams at district level),
h. decentralisation (extension planning and control under elected bodies at the district level) and
i. wider use of information technology and media
More details regarding merits and limitations of these innovations are given in Table 1. Another trend has been the formation of specific organisations (with less bureaucracy, more flexibility and wider expertise) to implement special programmes related to agricultural development. Formation of new organizations became essential due to the increasing inability of line departments such as the DoA to deliver results.
Table 1 : State level extension innovations- An analysis
Innovations Features Merits Gaps Crucial factors for successes
Group Moving from Extension worker able to DoA staff lack skills Adequate skills Approach Individual to group contact more number of in group formation. within the
approach farmers conflict resolution, entrepreneurshlp
organisation
a. commodity Can perform a large development, market Par tnership with groups number of functions if
motivated and assis ted development, etc. NGOs
properly They also do not have enough time to
Involvement of groups in more
b . general purpose Not much Impact attend to the needs number of g roups of groups activities (access
to credit, other c. working with Lot of potential for Success limited to Inputs and value
existing groups extension to work with KHDR UPSLRR and addition, group formed for g roups formed by other In some cases with market ing etc) different depar tment and women p rogrammes lead to pu rpose s p rogrammes
Make the system more farmer accountable provided the representatives of the group are Involved in decision making on extension and development
and ATMA sustalnability
Contact Office of DoA at the Farmers can contact the Most of the contact is Contact centres centres grass roo ts level DoA staff by traveling less for getting subsidised to act a s bridging below the Kerala - 1 for 1.3 distance Inputs or seeds organisat ions that block level villages (avg.) provide a wide
Maharash t ra - 1 for Though agricultural range of services 44 villages (avg.) officers are better including Karnataka - 1 for 36 qualified to solve diagnostic and villages (avg.) specific technical testing services. R^jasthan - 1 for problems, they don't training, marke t every 9 villages have adequate time Information and (avg.) functioning once in a week
for field visits market development services
Towards Market More number of farmers Lecture and more Committees assembled at one place discussion by intensive and opportuni ty to experts to a large trainings interact on messages group of farmers
Seed farms and Land and Infrastructure Reluctance to pos t Need a specific Horticultural * could be used for or redeploy staff for team to lead and nurse r ies demonst ra t ions and exclusively leading co-ordinate this
Zonal Research Stat ions
h a n d s on training with little additional suppor t
and co-ordinating this activity.
activity
Should have the flexibility and funds to identify the training needs and design and implement specific training p rogrammes
10
Innovations Features Merits Gaps Crucial factors for successes
Increasing Contracting In distant and remote They were provided Training In role of extension of certain areas, where the limited freedom to extension Private specific a reas to vacancies in DoA are Innovate better management to and NGO NGOs more, NGOs could be Institutional focus on the role sectors assisted to provide a r rangements and of private and
extension services were constra ined to Implement all the
NGO sectors in development.
Contracting NGOs have more schemes of the DoA value of implementat ion of flexibility and skills and pa r tne r sh ips and certain p rogrammes can implement Apparent reluctance skills on working to NGOs programmes effectively of GOs to part icipate
wholeheartedly with in teams
NGO-GO par tne r sh ips (UPSLRP. IFAD project In Tamil Nadu)
NGOs skills in group formation and management successfully complemented the implementat ion of p rogrammes
NGOs
Emerging extension Provide a wide range of Restricted to few Public sector models by private services to farmers districts and crops at organisat ions to agri-business Including extension and present , bu t growing facilitate, monitor companies are often paid services
Can assist in contract farming opera t ions
at a rapid pace and learn from these Initiatives
Public-private sector Both contribute to the Less en thus iasm and pa r tne r sh ips costs and manpower of
extension
Improve the operat ional budget for public sector extension
appreciat ion of these models within public sector at the ground level
Para PEW selected from Farmers can contact the Implemented In PEWs should not Extension each village PEW to get information certain cases as be viewed as Workers on p rogrammes and subst i tu tes for subs t i tu tes of (PEWs) messages t ransmit ted grassroot level DoA public sector
PEWs selected from through meeting / training staff staff. With or
without PEW, the agricultural Inadequate t raining effective committee of the (mostly one day pre- extension service village kharlj and pre-Rab()
to PEWs and they nei ther have the competence nor Interest to t ra in fellow farmers
depends on better qualified, well t rained and motivated extension staff at field level
PEW selected by a More accountable to the Found in only few PEWs need to be SHG/FIG of farmers group and when properly cases of externally ass is ted with to represent the trained can be very funded projects more knowledge group effective in transferring
technology and helping farmers to access a wide range of services
intensive and quality practical t raining
They should be selected by a farmer SHG /FIG
11
Innovations Features Merits Gaps Crucial factors for successes
Women In Village based and Improved farm women's Narrow focus on Farm women Agriculture Institutional training access to information and crop production . programmes
mostly on technologies and other identified should look technologies related increased adoption of training needs beyond crop to production of technologies and allied (related to food and production crops enterprises nutrition, animal
husbandry and Partnership with Forming farm Post harvest value poultry development) other organisations women SHGs addition and enterprise ignored during and working with
development as an Important activity In one
implementation existing groups of rural women
case (ANTWA-Phase 11) Poor marketing facilities and lack of follow-up support led to poor adoption of many enterprises promoted
Limited skills of DoA to implement a broader agricultural development agenda for farm women
promoted by other programmes is important
Women SHGs need to be supported with opportunities to increase income by way of developing micro-enterprises
Enlarged Noticed in 2 cases Support the DoA In Noticed only in the Need to be extension diagnostic field visits and case of 2 SAUs provided with role by Multl disciplinary in conducting extension adequate funds SAUs teams at each
district involved in and training programmes for field visits
and this activity diagnostic field Opportunity for SAU staff to be recognised visits, training and to get more familiar with as an important adaptive research field problems
Lead to better appreciation of each others effort and Improved research-extension linkages
contribution within the University
Increasing Gram sabhas / Facilitate development of States vary widely in Efforts to role of committees of need based and location the capacity of Improve the PRIs and farmers/ specific programme farmers/peoples capacity of farmer farmer development representatives in peoples representa representatives influencing positively representatives in tives scrutinises proposals More transparent and the planning and planning and
for agricultural democratic selection of implementation of Implementation development
Administrative control of field level staff with the PRIs
beneficiaries for implementation of programmes
programmes of programmes
12
Innovations Features Merits Gaps Crucial factors for successes
Information Use of Internet Widely used to provide Price information Technology - to disseminate market information (though important) and Media market
Information alone not sufficient to realise better prices by farmers
- to provide Several initiatives are Efforts at Developing information emerging consolidating, appropriate related to processing and programme weather. adding value to raw modules Is technologies, etc information and re equally or more
- to provide all packaging the same In important than other local language In an providing Information attractive format are hardware and needs of rural families
lacking at present connectivity
Use of video media Widely used by TV Though a potentially to telecast live Interactive programmes
channels promising area for public-private partnerships, efforts are lacking
Source : Sulaiman, V. R (2003)
2.4 Public sector extension-current status
The DoA is the only institution available throughout the country for farmers to consult for information, though their role in delivering information in non-foodgrain crops is limited. Commodity Boards (Rubber, Tea, Coffee, Spices) provide a large number of services, including extension, to farmers. The field extension activities of the Directorate of Extension of the State Agricultural Universit ies, agricultural colleges, and research stations of SAU/ICAR are restricted to a few villages around their location. ICAR has so far established 344 KVKs in the country. (ICAR has submitted a proposal to the Government of India seeking Rs.500 crores for establishing KVKs to cover the remaining districts of the country by the end of Xth Plan). KVKs are organizing a number of vocational training programs for farmers. ICAR is presently establishing 40 Agricultural Technology Information Centers (ATIC) attached to SAU/ICAR institute, wherein a single window facility provides farmers with information, inputs, and services. However, the service of ATIC could be optimally used by only those residing in the district or nearby districts and their location within public sector institutions often prevents transfer of information and technologies developed outside the public sector organizations.
13
The main extension function performed by DoA officials is the delivery of technical messages to individual farmers or farmer groups through visits to specific locations. These visits are not regular because of his / her pre-occupat ion with implementa t ion of a n u m b e r of central and state sector schemes having input /subsidy delivery. In several remote areas , the DoA h a s considerable difficulty in recrui t ing and retaining extension staff (Box 1).
Box 1 : Chronic difficulties facing publicly provided extension in remote areas
The majority of rural poor in India are located in areas weakly Integrated into marlcets. Apart from a few NGO initiatives, the majority of private sector innovations described above do not reach into these areas, and so the only extension service available is that provided by government. However, this is largely dysfunctional owing to chronic difficulties of three broad kinds:
First, all extension workers are permanent and pensionable civil servants, accountability to clients is limited, and promotion depends more on number of years in post than on capability. Remote areas are regarded by most as "punishment postings" and many staff newly recruited into these areas spend a large part of their time seeking transfer to more favoured locations. As observed in remote parts of Udaipur district in Rajasthan (Alsop et al, 1999), the consequence is that on an average almost 50% of posts are vacant.
Second, efforts to "broad-base" extension are in principle undoubtedly sound - i.e. extension workers should be able to advise on agriculture in its broad definition and not just on crops, and on aspects of input supply, processing and marketing (increasingly, on the Implications of new market specifications for production and processing technology). The difficulty, however, is that in general the capabilities of those willing to live in remote areas are limited and improved Impact across such a broad canvas would require long-term re-tralnlng (which Is rarely available) and more impact-oriented reward structures, which are unlikely to be Introduced within a permanent civil service structure.
Third, middle-management tends to be preoccupied with meeting targets which are inflexibly interpreted, lack client-orientation and are uninformed by any kind of institutional learning. As a consequence, field-level agents lack the space to try new ways of meeting client needs.
These factors suggest that publicly funded and publicly Implemented services in more remote areas of India face chronic difficulty and without considerable reform are unlikely to serve as a basis for greater poverty orientation In extension.
Source: Sulalman and Holt (2002)
14
Performance of the DoA is also adversely affected by depleting operational support and poor technical background of the majority of its employees. However, it is still a primary source of information for the majority of farmers though their satisfaction with this service varies widely. Farmer dependence on other farmers and input dealers as sources of information continues to be high (Sulaiman & Sadamate, 2000). Other government departments, such as Animal Husbandry and Horticulture provide only very limited attention to extension. The main focus of the Department of Animal Husbandry is on treatment of animals and for the Department of Horticulture, distribution of seeds/seedlings (of fruit and vegetables) is the priority. The functioning of the DoA across various states exhibit more similarities than differences and these are too glaring to leave unnoticed. This include:
i. A strong linear hierarchy (from Commissioner/Director of agriculture at the top to Joint Directors, Deputy Directors, Assistant Directors, Agricultural Officers and Agricultural Assistant or the Village Extension worker at the village level). Each extension personnel on an average cover about 2-7 villages, except in Kerala where every village has about 3 extension personnel.
ii. Some features of T & V still continue in the organisational structure of DoA and implementation of extension programmes. The notable among them is the mechanism of research-extension linkages through monthly/bi-monthly workshops, fortnightly meetings, meeting of Zonal Research Extension Advisory Committee (ZREAC) etc. States such as Tamil Nadu still follow the permanent field visit schedule for village extension workers.
iii. DoA staff perform a very narrow extension role, limited to technology dissemination for increasing agricultural productivity.
iv. Implementation of a large number of schemes (state schemes, central sector schemes, centrally sponsored schemes and externally ass is ted schemes) with specific targets on demonstrations, distribution of subsidised inputs and subsidies and training, leave only little time for VEWs for assisting farmers with advice on solving specific field problems.
v. DoA has a number of farms for producing seeds and other planting materials, several training centres for training staff and farmers and labs for testing seeds, pesticides and fertilisers. Delivery of inputs such as fertilisers is an important activity of DoA in North-Eastern States like Tripura.
15
vi. DoA has relatively few staff at operational level (district and below) to implement the large number of programmes. Restrictions on fresh recruitment, reduction of cadre strength and deputation of stciff to other departments are the main reasons for this situation. The manpower available with the Department of Horticulture in all the states is limited, with the exception of Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir and Uttaranchal.
vii. Limited operational budgets impose serious constraints on mobility of staff for implementation and monitoring of extension and other development programmes.
Some of the constraints in implementation of extension programmes were resolved to a greater extent in programmes such as Kerala Horticultural Development Programme (KHDP), under implementation in 9 districts of Kerala and Diversified Agricultural Support Project (DASP), under implementation in 32 districts of Uttar Pradesh and 5 districts of Uttaranchal. These projects have been different in terms of its approach and underlying philosophy. Lessons on the implementation of these projects provide several useful ideas for planning new extension programmes.
Kerala Horticultural Development Programme
The Government of Kerala in 1992 established Kerala Horticultural Development Programme (KHDP) as an autonomous organisation with European Community financial assistance. The aim of KHDP was to increase and stabilise the income of fruit and vegetable farmers. A key element of this was envisaged as technology transfer. But its success has been related to embedding this in a much wider set of related activities and adoption of an experimentation and learning approach to programme development (Box 2).
Box 2 : Key elements of KHDP A new organisation with professional and diverse skills- A new organisation was established with consultants and 250 young professionals skilled In agriculture, business management and social work.
Experiments to access technology- Recognising the need to develop appropriate technological solutions for farmers, KHDP Initially funded research In the State Agricultural University. A five-year agreement was signed with the university to provide research backstopping.
16
However, because of a number of institutional constraints in the university It was not possible to arrive at a satisfactory long-term contract research arrangement. This lesson was learnt over a protracted and uneasy series of negotiations to try and arrive at adequa te ly farm focused r e sea rch and adapt ive technology development protocols. Through experimentation (and necessity) KHDP found that much of the envisaged formal research role of the University could be replaced by employing graduate level agricultural officers who were willing and able to under take part icipatory technology development (PTD) with farmers. It was found, however, that some formal research assistance is still required. This is contracted out for very specific and well defined short term tasks.
Organisational development- In its early years KHDP quickly found that it needed to organise farmers into groups, both to help promote new technology and PTD skills as well as to help farmers access credit and strengthen negotiating power through collective marketing. The subsequent development of self help groups (SHG) with master farmers arose out of a process of trial and error, to find out the size of groups, how these would be managed, the types of activity that they could engage in collectively and the procedures for resolving disputes.
Farmers as partners - To ensure a dependable source of income to farmers through processing their produce, KHDP also established a modern pineapple processing factory with farmers as share holders. Today the produce from the factory is traded in the domestic and international markets.
Transformation as a new organisational entity- Unlike the usual end of most external funded programmes, the KHDP re-invented its future by registering it as a company the "Vegetable and Fruit Promotion Council, Kerala"(VFPCK) in 2001 under Indian companies act to provide continued support to growers. The farmer SHGs hold 50 % of the shares of the VFPCK. The remaining 50 % shares are held by the state government and agencies such as banks and research institutions.
Diversified Agricultural Support Project
The project was s ta r ted with World Bank ass is tance in 27 dis t r ic ts of Uttar P radesh dur ing 1998, bu t after creat ion of Ut taranchal , th ree dis t r ic ts were reduced. Later on, 8 new dis t r ic ts were added after three years and now the project is being implemented in 32 dis t r ic ts of Uttar Pradesh and 5 dis tr ic ts of Uttaranchal . The project a ims at increas ing agricultural productivity and income of farmers through: diversification of a g r i c u l t u r a l p r o d u c t i o n s y s t e m s , p r o m o t i o n of p r iva t e s e c t o r par t ic ipat ion, improving ru ra l infrastructure and marke t ing suppor t ,
17
strengthening grass root level institutions, improving research-extension linkages, promotion of bio-villages and seed villages and setting up of Agricultural Technology Management Agency (ATMA) for effective coordination and convergence of resources.
All the activities are being implemented through active involvement of people, especially the SHG members. A number of Farmer Interest Groups (FIG), Commodity Groups (CG), Women Self Help Group (WSHG) are beingformed in villages with the help of NGOs. Many groups have started saving large amount and this is helping the group members in easy accessibility of credit. A number of innovative approaches have been adopted for dissemination of technology to farmers. Farmer-led extension and concept of establishing Farmer School in each block is progressing well. The project has been employing para vets for improving animal health and breed. To promote privatisation of service, two blocks have been given exclusively to NGOs for carrying out demand driven activities without involvement of government department. The project however suffers from top down approach, weak performance of ATMA, inadequate involvement of people in preparation of action plan and shortage of field functionaries (Singh, 2003). Both KHDP cind DASP have pioneered several innovative methods to achieve a broader mandate for agricultural development, but innovations of this type have not been capitalised upon.
2.5 Recent central government initiatives
The Department of Agriculture and Co-operation (DAC) of the central Ministry of Agriculture has a separate Division of Extension. Extension Division lays down major policy guidelines on extension matters and the Directorate of Extension implements specific programmes and activities. Directorate of Extension of the DAC has been supporting the states for implementing the following programmes in the IX Plan (1997-2002):
a. Support to NGOs and Farmer Organisations,
b. Women in agriculture,
c. Farmer Scientist Interaction and State/District level R-E Interfaces,
d. Exposure visit of farmers/extension functionaries,
e. Print media/Kisan mela support to SAUs and
f. . Support for training for improving the technical competency of extension functionaries
18
However, the most ambitious has been the Innovations in Technology Dissemination (ITD) component of the World Bank funded National Agricultural Technology Project (NATP).
2.5.1. ITD component of NATP
The project is implemented in 7 states namely, Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Maharashtra, Orissa and Punjab since November 1998. The project provides for pilot testing the following innovations:
a. new institutional arrangement for technology dissemination at the district level (28 districts, 4 each in 7 states) and below through establishment of Agricultural Technology Management Agency (ATMA) as an autonomous body,
b. moving towards integrated extension delivery,
c. adopting bottom-up planning procedures for setting the research-extension agenda,
d. making technology dissemination farmer driven and farmer accountable,
e. addressing gender concerns in agriculture and
f. increas ing use of information technology for effective dissemination.
Programme interventions are based on a strategic research and extension plan (SREP) prepared in a participatory mode. Farm Information and Advisory Centres (FIAC) are created at the block level to act as the operational arm of ATMA. A Block Technology Team (BTT), comprising technical personnel at the block level and a Farmer Advisory Committee (FAC) comprising all key stakeholders and farmers representatives are also constituted at the block level. Under the project, a state level Agricultural Management and Extension Training Institute (SAMETI) has been created in all the project states to provide training to state extension functionaries on innovative areas of project management, participatory planning, HRD and information technology.
Though the ITD component of NATP has been in implementation since 1998, ATMAs have been established in different phases across 28 districts. As a result the impact of the project has not been uniform in all the districts. A summary of performance of ATMA's is given in Box 3.
19
Box 3 : ATMA- lessons so far
• The integrated implementation of field activities is worliable but depends considerably on the state government's commitment to Internalize and practice these new concepts.
• All ATMAs have made considerable progress on diversification and intensification of different farming systems.
• The Bloclc Technology Teams (BTTs) and Farmer Advisory Committees (FACs) need to play a more active role in preparation of bloclc action plans.
• Several farmer interest groups and women farmer interest groups have been formed and some of them have initiated joint activities. There is a need to involve NGOs in forming groups of farmers.
• Integrated package of exposure visit, training and demonstration has resulted in better technology adoption.
• Public research system has become more responsive to development of location specific demand-driven technologies. The adaptive research sponsored by ATMA has been successful in providing location specific solutions to many problems.
• The process of public-private partnership has begun, but it will take some time for taking concrete shape. All ATMAs have started charging some token money from farmers for participation in training, exposure visit and demonstrations, but these are not adequate for financial sustainability of ATMAs.
The flexibility to quickly respond to training and information needs of farmers, the availability of a reasonably good untied operational budget and participation of the farming community by way of FAC at the block level are the major factors behind the apparent success of ATMA. However the project suffers from weak process documentation and internal monitoring and evaluation system. While district level reforms have attained appreciable achievements, the block level operations has not moved at the same rate in many states, mainly due to shortage of staff at the block level and also the level of their skill. They require comprehensive capacity building in terms of concepts of the project, formation of groups, preparation of block plans, participatory mechanism, and technical skill upgradation.
Source: IIM, Lucknow (2003); Singh, R.P (2003)
2 .5 .2 Agri-clinics and agri-business centres
The main aim of the scheme is to provide accountable extension services to fa rmers th rough technically t ra ined agricul tural g radua tes at the village level. The p rog ramme is financed through b a n k loans, and the
20
central government would provide 25% of the cost as subsidy. The plan is to establish 5,000 agri-clinics to provide testing facilities, diagnostic and control services and other consultancies on a fee-for service basis. The average cost of each individual venture would be around Rs.5 lakh with an outer ceiling of Rs.lO lakh. If two or more individuals want to undertake a joint/group venture, a combined project in terms of multiples of Rs. 10 lakh could be considered for being supported under the scheme. The cost of such venture could go up to a maximum of Rs.50 lakh for a group of 5 or more applicants.
The programme implemented jointly through Small Farmers Agribusiness Consortium (SFAC) and National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management (MANAGE) has attracted a large number of unemployed agricultural graduates. By the end of year 2002, 15609 graduates have applied for training under this scheme. 57 institutions are involved in this massive training programme. 2853 graduates have either completed or are undergoing training and by the end of June 2003, 557 agripreneurs have started agri-clinics or agri-business centres undertaking a variety of agripreneurial activities in different parts of the country (MANAGE, 2002a, 2003a, 2003b). NABARD facilitates bank credit for this purpose on priority sector lending terms and the Government of India is examining extending credit linked back-end subsidies for identified ventures, either singly or in a package, one time or in installments, to make the activity (ies) viable and self-sustaining.
2.6 X Plan Initiatives
During the Xth Plan (2002-2007), the Department of Agriculture and Co-operation (DAC) of the Ministry of Agriculture, propose to implement a res t ructured centrally sponsored scheme to suppor t extension programmes of states (Box 4). This new scheme is an instrument to operationalise the reforms as conceived in the Policy Framework for Agricultural Extension (Annexure 1).
Box 4 : Central government support to extension in X Plan
Each state prepare a state extension work plan (SEWP), comprising a mix of ongoing extension programmes from the IX plan and a set of new initiatives.
SEWP is an annual proposal of extension strategies, activities and investments prepared by the state centering around reforms envisaged in the Policy Framework of Agricultural Extension (PFAE).
21
• The expenditure for implementing the programmes in the SEWP would be shared between the centre and the state in the ratio of 90: 10.
• No funds would be provided for vehicle, major civil works and staff salary. Funding for core establishment and infrastructure (for ATMA like model) has to be borne by the states.
• SEWPs to have three important aspects -a- Public sector reforms b- Promotion of private sector initiatives c- Promotion of media and IT applications
• Public extension system would be re-organised in a new structure (ATMA model) which facilitates a participatory mode of extension delivery, which is farmer driven and farmer accountable.
• Size of funding would be proportionate to reforms proposed, its coverage and state's commitment
• 25% of the total SEWP allocation must reflect direct support to women farmers.
Source: DAC (2002b)
2 .7 Public investments in extens ion
Agricul tural extension is a s ta te subject . The centra l government ' s suppor t for extension under various p rog rammes was significant until the closure of the Training and Visit (T & V) scheme sponsored by the World Bank which concluded in the mid 1990s. Since then direct suppor t of Central government to states for extension activities has been very l imi ted . "The ac tua l cos t ( including sa la ry a n d all o ther cos ts ) of operat ing T & V based extension services in India (17 states) is about Rs .4000 million or US$ 150 million. This works out to about Rs.50/-(US $ 2.0) per agricultural farm holding or about Rs.27 (US $ 1.0) per h a cult ivated land in 1991"(]VIacklin, 1992). "Annual inves tment in ex tens ion by s ta te gove rnmen t s d u r i n g the t r i e n n i u m 1992-94 , in nominal t e rms is Rs .3008 million, giving an investment of Rs. 16.22 per ha." (Pal and Singh, 1997). The same s tudy also est imated the annua l expendi ture per extension worker as Rs. 26 t housand (average of all depar tmen t s ) , whereas it is as low as R s . l 5 t housand for the main extension system, i.e., the DoA.
Sula iman and Sadamate (2000) found the average extension expenditure intensity of the DoA (including salary costs) based on three Indian s tates as Rs. 44 .94 per ha. When salary costs are excluded, the intensity was
22
found to be Rs. 4.57 per ha. Salary accounts for about 85-97% of the government expenditure of DoA, thereby leaving only 3-15% for operational expenditure. This has led to under-utilisation of the existing facilities and personnel. Clarr and Bentz (1984) observed that extension should not commit more than 60-70% of its budgetary resources for personnel emolument, so that it can provide sufficient funds for programme operations.
According to the Ministry of Agriculture, "left to themselves, most states, suffering under general financial constraints were unable to effectively carry out extension activities. Several of them were barely able to pay the salaries of their extension functionaries, leave alone, provide funds for demonstrations, mobility, skill upgradation, etc (DAC, 2002b). For full scale implementation of extension reforms suggested in PFAE all over the country during the Xth Plan requires Rs. 1000 crores. However, the central government support is of the order of Rs. 300 crores only In the Xth Plan. The states are expected to contribute 10 % of the cost and the total funding available would come to Rs.333 crores. Achieving financial sustainability and resource mobilisation is an important reform agenda suggested in the PFAE and this is expected to be achieved through cost cutting, efficient use of available resources, privatisation of agro-services, realistic cost recovery, co-financing, and initiating new financial systems such as revolving funds.
2.8 Lessons
1. DoA and other line departments still face several constraints in providing adequate extension support to farmers.
2. Implementation of a large number of central and state sector schemes with specific targets to achieve consume a major share of block and village level officials' time. Very little attention could therefore be paid for diagnostic field visits, advice on technological options and strengthening capacity of farmers (mobilisation of farmers and supporting farmers groups).
3. Technology dissemination continues to be understood as the main extension role and other support needs of farmers that became very important in the last one decade remain unattended. This include: provision of access to a range of non-technology services including input and output markets and strengthening and support of farmers organisations.
23
4. To provide these wide range of support, DoA need to partner with other organisations in the public and private sector having these expertise. But line departments such as DoA generally work in isolation and partnerships are rare.
5. The central ised planning and implementat ion of extension programmes and the associated bureaucratic procedures leave practically very little flexibility to the block and village level functionaries to modify programmes based on farmers' needs.
6. ATMA could successfully solve some of these problems as it is free from many bureaucratic and time consuming procedures and this provided ATMAs the much-needed flexibility to quickly respond to dernands from the field. Mechanisms such as SRER FAC and block action plans supported with adequate funds contributed to making ATMA demand driven. But performance of ATMA varies widely across states and districts and the reasons behind this differential impact need to be understood.
7. The DoA poorly serves tribal and remote areas and special efforts are needed to fill vacancies in these areas. Special and innovative extension programmes need to be developed with participation of farmers for these areas.
8. Group approach has a number of advantages. But FIGs/SHGs of farmers need institutional support (be if from NGOs, financial i n s t i tu t ions , agr i -bus iness firms, m a r k e t commit tees , or government technical agencies) and they also need to be provided with oppor tun i t i e s to enhance their capaci ty to a d d r e s s management, legal and social issues. How the DoA would support SHGs/FIGs in these aspects is not yet clear.
9. There is an increasing attention to the potential role of para extension workers. How successfully these PEWs transfer skills to other farmers is not clear. PEWs representing a SHG/FIGs of farmers may perhaps be more accountable to fellow farmers than those selected by a few farmers in a village or nominated by the government.
10. Technology backstopping provided as part of a wider basket of agricultural production and marketing assistance is more efficient.
24
11. Though Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) offer many options for improving extension efficiency, organisations in the public sector are yet to exploit its potential. With infrastructural and hardware deficiencies getting sorted out, the challenge seems to be in producing content relevant to specific locations in the regional language, value addition to raw information and in developing systems at local level that ensure access to all farmers.
12. The Policy Framework for Agricultural Extension (PFAE) of the Ministry of Agricul ture suggests ways for improving the performance of extension. Though the broad contours of policy changes suggested are well considered and relevant, the PFAE underplays crucial implementation problems of introducing reforms. Some of the reforms have been a part of the extension practice for about a decade. There is a need to learn lessons from the implementation of these reforms, to guide policy changes at the national and state levels.
13. Keeping in view the wide diversity in terms of agro-climatic conditions, socio-economic conditions of rural producers and infrastructure for agricultural development, a country-wide model for agricultural extension would be counter productive. HRD efforts should concentrate on enhancing the capacity of officials and peoples representatives at the block, district and state levels in developing innovative extension strategies appropriate to local conditions.
25
CHAPTER 3
PRIVATE SECTOR EXTENSION IN INDIA
India has a large and diverse private sector involved in its agricultural development. This include all non-public sector agencies, such as:
a. input agencies (dealing with seeds, fertilisers, pesticides, equipments),
b. large agri-business houses (involved in manufacture and sale of inputs and purchase of outputs),
c. agro-processing firms involved in contract farming,
d. farmer organisations and producer co-operatives,
e. non-governmental organisations (NGOs),
f. media (print, radio and television) and web based agri-service providers,
g. agri-consultancy providers (individuals and firms),
h. financial agencies involved in rural credit delivery, and
i. informal extension agents such as progressive farmers and local dealers selling agri-inputs at the village and rural markets.
3.1 Input agency extension
Many agro-input companies perform some extension functions. This may also be viewed as one function of marketing and often it is the marketing officers who oversee the extension-related functions. Major categories of agro-input companies include, those dealing with seeds, fertilisers, pesticides and agro-machinery. The input agencies spent a greater share of resources on advertisements, mainly to boost the sale of its products. It could vary from billboards, wall paintings, leaflets and advertisements in newspapers, farm magazines and television channels. They also take up few demonstrations to publicise new products. Some of them also sponsor farmer meetings or seminars organised by line departments such as DoA. These companies do not provide any extension support to individual growers or farmer groups as they employ only limited manpower in their target area.
Large seed companies have one marketing officer to take care of its
27
produc t s (linking with the dealers , create demand and ma tch supply with demand) for a dis t r ic t or a g roup of d is t r ic ts and one or two marke t ing ass i s tan ts to help them. The companies prefer graduates in agriculture for this job , bu t this is not an essential qualification. Pushing sales being their p r imary manda te , the market ing officers/assistants se ldom deal directly with farmers . But in high value c rops such as flowers, there are input firms, which provide total extension suppor t to their growers . These include, advice from site selection to technological guidance throughout the growing per iod and advice on market ing. The cost of this service forms a pa r t of the input cost. Growing high value flowers is a r isky option, because of high capital investments and little experience of farmers in growing them. Moreover, the capability of other extension agencies such as line depa r tmen t s or universit ies is poor in this area. Unless suppor t ed by the companies , farmers are not likely to grow them.
Unlike the case of seed companies , the extension activities of fertiliser companies are more visible and diverse, though it is difficult to fully differentiate m a r k e t promot ion and extension activity. Indian Farmers Fer t i l i ser Co-opera t ive Limi ted (IFFCO) a n d K r i s h a k B h a r a t i Cooperat ive (KRIBHCO), the two major fertiliser co-operat ives in the country are actively Involved in organising several extension activities. They conduct farmers meetings, organise crop seminars , ar range soil tes t ing facilities and also implement village adopt ion p r o g r a m m e s . Though the technical manpower available with them is limited, they ar range several p rog rammes in close collaboration with DoA and state ag r i cu l tu ra l un ive r s i t i e s . For fa rmer mee t ings , s e m i n a r s , etc, the company ar ranges services of experts from line depar tmen t s . KRIBHCO has also initiated a society "Gramin Vikas Trust" (GVT), to promote rura l development activities (Box 5).
Box 5 : Gramin Vikas Trust
Gramin Vikas Trust (GVT) is a society promoted by KRIBHCO with the support of the Government of India and Department of International Development (DFID), UK to manage rural development projects. The objectives of GVT are to:
a. improve the livelihoods of poor tribal farming communities,
b. develop and implement gender and poverty focused participatory approaches,
c. establish village based institutions,
28
d. set-up training centres for capacity building of communities and
e. provide consultancy on rural development to different organisations, Institutions, agencies and persons.
GVT is currently managing two projects namely Eastern India Rainfed Farming Project (EIRFP) and Western India Rainfed Farming Project (WIRFP). EIRFP Is implemented in nine districts of Jharkhand (Ranchl, Latehar, Hazarlbagh and Sarainkela), Orissa (Dhenkanal, Keonjhar and Mayurbhanj) and West Bengal (Mldnapur and Purulla). The project has been In operation since 1995 and Is working In 250 core villages and 550 dissemination villages. WIRFP Is working in seven districts of Madhya Pradesh ( Jhabua , Ratlam and Dhar) , Rajasthan (Banswara and Dungarpur) and Gujarat (Dahod and Panchmahal). The project is in operation in 202 core villages with 394 dissemination villages.
Project components Include: development of farming systems and sustainable livelihoods in core villages; dissemination of project technologies and approaches In d isseminat ion villages through par tnersh ips via government, NGOs and other organisations and participatory technology development through collaborative research with national and overseas research institutions. The project is Implemented through a team of 324 professionally qualified women and men of different backgrounds such as rural development, agriculture, agricultural engineering, forestry, social sciences, livestock and aquaculture. The project works through Jankars , para professionals (men and women) selected from the community for dissemination of technologies and mobilisation of people.
Source: Tomar (2003)
Tata Chemicals Limited, an agro-chemical company has initiated Tata Kisan Kendras (TKKs) in 1998 with the objective to provide the farmer with a package of inputs and services. About 300 TKKs have been already existing in three s ta tes , namely Uttar Pradesh , Punjab and Haryana . The TKKs provide diagnostic services such as soil, water and p lan t test ing; access to credi t a n d i n s u r a n c e , pos t -ha rves t m a n a g e m e n t services and extension educat ion p rog rammes , including t ra in ing of farmers and ru ra l women. AGROCEL another agri-chemical company based in Gujarat h a s s ta r ted Agro Service Cent res in Maharash t r a , Haryana and J a m m u & Kashmir to provide all agri-inputs and necessary technical guidance to farmers .
D h a n u k a a n o t h e r l e a d i n g p e s t i c i d e c o m p a n y h a s e n t e r e d i n t o pa r tne r sh ip with the DoA in Madhya P radesh to provide a wide range of services to farmers in Hoshangabad District. Dhanuka and the DoA work together in a r ea s such as soil testing, t ra ining and organis ing fa rmer t ou r s (Box 6).
29
Box 6 : Public-private partnerships in agricultural extension in Madhya Pradesh
The DoA signed the first Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) regarding implementation of public-private partnership in agriculture with Dhanuka group for agricultural extension in Hoshangabad district of Madhya Pradesh. Dhanuka is one of India's leading group in crop protection business. The MoU aims to work together in areas like soil testing, training, farmer tours, demonstrations, transfer of technology through cyber dhabas, agriculture fortnights, establishment of markets and providing credit facilities to farmers. The programme was formally launched in November 2001. At the district level, the Deputy Director of Agriculture of the DoA and the nodal officer of the group monitor and implement the programmes.
The achievements till March 2003 are as follows:
a. Soil testing
i. Handing over of the soil-testing laboratory in Hoshangabad to Dhanuka. DoA meet the cost of chemicals and equipment and the group employs its own staff and meet their salary costs. Government saved Rs. l7 lakhs per year on salary costs.
ii. Addition of 8 staff for field extension activities in the district by Dhanuka group.
ill. Four fold increase in the number of samples tested. iv. Nine dealer centres of Dhanuka acting as collection centre of soil
samples. V. Faster and timely communication of soil test results to farmers.
b. Joint planning, funding and implementation of extension programmes
vi. 24 training programmes at the district level and 107 training programmes at the block level
vii. Demonstrations-Khari/"?, i?abi 9 viii. Farm visits and demonstrations- 3678
ix. Village training- 1358 x. Training on organic farming-21 villages
xi. Agricultural fairs- block level - 6, district level - 2
Dhanuka considers this investment as a way of improving its corporate image. Sponsorship or Joint funding and Implementation of extension programme provide them an opportunity to reach new customers. For the government, participation with the group provides access to funds to supplement its limited operational budget and thereby Improve programme coverage.
Source: Government of Madhya Pradesh (2001)
30
3.2 Major agri-business initiatives
Major agri-business firms Mahindra, Rallis and ITC in the last three years have initiated innovative arrangements to provide farmers with integrated production and marketing support. All of them are new experiments and these firms are still evolving their strategies.
Mahindra and Mahindra Limited, India's leading tractor and utility vehicles manufacturer, has entered the private extension scene through forming a subsidiary Mahindra ShubLabh Services Ltd (MSSL), that opened its first centre [Mahindra Krishi Vihar or MKV) in Madurai District of Tamil Nadu in October 2000, primarily to cater to paddy growers. Encouraged by the success of this new approach, new centres are being established in other districts of Tamil Nadu and in various other states. Though started initially as joint ventures with its existing tractor dealers, the company is presently expanding its operation through franchisees. MSSL aims to expand this model to new crops and hope to cover 50 districts in 11 states by March 2004. The MKVs provide the following services:
sell quality farm inputs (seeds, fertilisers and pesticides),
rent out farm equipment (tractors, harvesters, dryers, etc.),
arrange credit (in partnership with banks),
offer farm advice by trained field supervisors who visit fields and supervise critical farm operations, and
buy the produce (through contracts with processing units).
In Madurai, within a year, the paddy area registered with the company increased from 797 acres to 2000 acres. In paddy, the services are provided at the rate of Rs. 500 per acre per season. The company has expanded its services to other crops such as sugarcane, maize and wheat. MSSL is also providing its extension services to farmers in Punjab, who have entered into contract farming through Punjab Agro Industries Corporation.
Rallis is one of India's leading agri-input companies, supplying pesticides, fertilisers and seeds. The company Initiated the concept of Rallis Kisan Kendra (RKK) to provide integrated services to farmers. Currently the company has established 10 RKKs in wheat, soyabean, vegetables and fruits in five states. RKKs provide the following services to farmers:
31
• visit by agronomists to the fields of farmers at regular intervals (on an agreed schedule)
• facilitate credit to farmers (through banks)
• provide all farm Inputs (seeds, fertiliser and plant protection chemicals)
• soil testing
• procure the entire produce of the grower (on behalf of other market partners)
The first RKK was established at Panipat district of Haryana in July 2001. Starting with 584 farmers In the first year (with a registered area of 3600 acres of basmati), the scheme expanded to 725 farmers in year 2 (with a registered area of 5000 acres of basmati). The enrollment fee charged Is RslOO irrespective of the size of holding (The charges vary by crop and the nature of services provided). The Panipat centre has also started providing these services in wheat. The other project locations Include: Plperla, Athrauli, Hardoi and Shahjahanpur for wheat and basmati and Nashlk and Chltradurga for fruits and vegetables. Its marketing partners include, Hindustan Lever, Plcrik, Cargil and Food World.
Indian Tobacco Company (ITC) is a market leader in tobacco products, hotels, and packaging, and its International Business Division is one of India's largest exporters of agricultural commodities. ITC's new extension effort revolves around e-choupals, which are village Internet kiosks that enable access to information on weather, market prices and scientific farm practices. Launched in June 2000, the company has so far established 1200 e-choupals across four states (Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh). The services reach more than 750,000 farmers growing soybean, coffee, wheat, rice, pulses and shrimp. Each kiosk is run by a local farmer (sanchalak), selected from the village and provided with short training. The services offered to farmers through the e-choupal Include:
• information on all aspects of cultivation through the ITC website in the local language.
• dally information from different markets of the state and the price ITC offers for the produce for the next day.
• forum to post and receive farming queries via e-mail.
• detailed district-specific weather information (sourced from the state Department of Meteorology).
32
• a n a s s u r e d p r i c e a t ITC's p r o c u r e m e n t c e n t r e s , p r o p e r weighing, and immediate payment .
• quality inputs and services (offered by var ious pa r tne r s ) .
The company provides the infras t ructure for the choupal, including a computer, a printer, UPS system, solar panel and internet connectivity through VSAT. The sanchalak provides the space and h a s to meet o ther operat ional expendi tures such as electricity charges . The sanchalak has a t ransac t ion-based income. Fa rmers are free to use this facility and there is no fee or registration charge. ITC plans to extend the e-choupal initiative to 11 other s ta tes ac ross India over the next seven years .
These new initiatives provide very impor tan t l essons for organis ing extension services (Box 7).
Box 7 : Agri-business initiatives-lessons so far
These institutional innovations are less than 3 years old, but they reveal some important features of the emerging private sector involvement in extension.
a. A clear win-win situation for both farmers (access to quality inputs and services, enhanced productivity and better prices); and the agri-business firms (lower transaction costs, access to better quality produce, and better corporate Image).
b. The value of partnerships among different firms to provide farmers a wide range of inputs and services at a single point.
c. Farmers' willingness to pay for quality services
d. Preliminary evidence of increase in productivity when farmers are supported with information, field visits, quality Inputs, reliable access to output markets, and non-exploitative and timely credit.
3 .3 Farmer organisations and producer co-operat ives
User groups , including farmer interest groups, farmer clubs, commodi ty groups , women farmer g roups , special interest g roups etc., play a very impor tan t role in extension. There are only very few functional farmer organisat ions in India. Farmer associat ions are pr imar i ly accountable to their m e m b e r s and they spend heavily on extension (Sula iman and S a d a m a t e , 2 0 0 0 ) . One of the o ldes t a n d m o s t success fu l f a r m e r organisat ions in India is the Grape Growers Association of Maha ra sh t r a {Maharashtra Rajya Draksha Bagaitdar Sangh or MRDBS). MRDBS provides a wide range of services to its member p r o d u c e r s (Box 8).
33
Box 8 : Extension by farmer association - A case of MRDBS
With an estimated membership of 17,000 grape growers, the Maharashtra Rajya Draksha Bagaitdar Sangh (MRDBS) established in 1960, has been the main force behind the development of grape cultivation in the state. The 20 elected members (growers) of the association work as extension functionaries for MRDBS. The association has offices at Sangli, Solapur, Pune and Nasik. It organises regular group discussions and seminars and publishes leaflets, booklets and a monthly Draksh Vrutha (in marathi language). It imports plant growth regulators, dipping oil, etc., and distributes it to the growers at a no-loss-no-profit basis. It has an independent R & D wing, own research farm and facilities for soil, water and plant analysis. The association brings experts to tackle major problems in grape cultivation. The association had been instrumental in the creation of MAHAGRAPES, a confederation of 17 grape growers societies in 1991.
United Planters Association of Southern India (UPASI) the apex body of tea, coffee, rubber and cardamom growers in South India, has a long tradition in leadership, research and extension services in the plantation industry. It is engaged in research, statistical analysis, commodity affairs, industrial relations, taxation, finance, legal issues, publications and public relations and represents the growers interest in national and internat ional forums. It also organises, conferences, seminars , workshops and rural development programme. UPASI has established a tea research foundation and has seven advisory centres for transfer of technology. It also has a Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVK) sponsored by ICAR.
The group approach promoted by DoA in Kerala resulted in formation of commodity specific groups of farmers growing paddy, coconut and pepper. Some of these groups evolved later to take up a number of joint activities including extension. Promoting farmer self help groups (SHGs) is an important component of projects such as Kerala Horticultural Development P rogramme (KHDP), Uttar P r a d e s h Sodic Land Reclamation Project (UPSLRP) and Uttar Pradesh Diversified Agricultural Support Project (UPDASP). KHDP formed SHGs of vegetable and fruit growers to help promote new technology and participatory technology development (PTD) skills, help farmers access credit and strengthen their negotiating power through collective marketing. Promoting women SHGs is also a key activity of the Central Sector Scheme of Women in Agriculture. Forming farmer interest groups and federating them at the block and district levels is considered as an important strategy to
34
strengthen farmer organisations. This is being currently attempted in the ATMA pilot districts. The idea is to encourage farmer groups to organise different tj^es of services for themselves, including input supply, credit, technical services and marketing arrangements-activities that would increase their productivity and incomes, while decreasing their dependence on government.
However, only very few of the commodity groups formed so far by DoA remain active and functional. A few of them have even expanded the scope of their activities to take up active extension role in other crops and initiating new income generating activities. However these are exceptions, as many remain dysfunctional due to lack of efforts in sustaining these groups. SHGs cannot be formed overnight to meet over ambitious and strictly applied physical and financial targets. SHGs need to be supported during the formation stage, strengthening stage and self-help stage. Groups also need continuous support to meet and deal with new challenges. DoA staff lack many of the crucial social science skills required for this task. DoA should either train its staff or should contract other organisations such as NGOs to help them in this task. NGOs such as Aga Khan Rural Support Programme (India) and Sajjatha Sangh, (a network of NGOs engaged in farmer participatory extension) have been federating farmer associations to cater to the production, marketing and extension needs of member farmers in Western India with notable success (Shah, 2003, Krishnan, 2003).
Producers' co-operatives are often formed to improve the marketing prospects in specific commodities where marke t operat ions are disadvantageous to producers. They provide farmers the advantage of economies of scale by bringing together produce from individual farms and marketing the same. Some of these organisations also provide extension services to farmers. These include: milk marketing federations in various states; rubber producers' societies (RPS) in Kerala; sugar cooperatives in Maharashtra; and vegetable and lac co-operatives in Bihar.
3.4 Non-Governmental (voluntary) Organisations (NGOs)
Estimates of the number of NGOs active in rural development in India range from fewer than 10,000 to several hundred thousand depending on the type of classification used. Some 15,000-20,000 are actively engaged in rural development. India has a number of NGOs with varying levels of capacity, implementing a wide range of programmes. Bharatiya Agro-Industries Federation (BAIF), Professional Assistance for
35
Development Action (PRADAN) and Action for Food Production (APPRO) are some of the important NGOs working in several states. Wide variation in density of NGOs exists among states. Within states, certain districts have high density of NGOs, which overlap and compete for clients, while in other areas, there are hardly any NGOs active on the ground. The eighties saw a spurt in the growth of rural development focused NGOs and several of them got actively involved in watershed development. In the nineties, several NGOs got involved in promotion of micro-credit through organising SHGs. Due to their effectiveness and flexible operat ional mechanisms , governments are increasingly finding partnering with NGOs attractive. Several Ministries of the Union Government have a separate provision to fund NGOs for specific activities.
The Ministry of Agriculture has initiated a scheme "Agricultural Extension through voluntary organisations" in the year 1994-95 with a view to integrate their efforts with those of the main extension system. Initially the scheme was implemented on pilot basis by involving 14 NGOs from 8 states. The scheme was later expanded to 50 NGOs. Under this scheme, NGOs are funded for documentation of farming systems at the micro level, audio-visual p repara t ion and procurement , t ra ining and demonstrations, farmers visit to research stations, administrative support and contingencies.
The states are also encouraging the NGOs to take up extension activities. The DoA, Rajasthan initiated agricultural extension and development programme with participation of NGOs under the World Bank assisted Agricultural Development Project (1992). Under this project, the functioning of three assistant agricultural officer circles were handed over to NGOs. Many NGOs were also given grants for specific projects related to heifer development, integrated watershed development, vermi-composting, etc. These activities have been completed in 2000.
Uttaranchal is currently using the services of NGOs for implementing a number of programmes related to organic agriculture. A number of programmes for self employment in compost making, mushroom production, poultry development and angora rabbit wool production are also implemented by DRDAs through NGOs (Government of Uttaranchal, 2002). In Andhra Pradesh, farmer organisations and NGOs are assisted to provide agricultural consultancy services to farmers. A maximum of Rs. 36,000 is provided for this purpose to NGOs at the rate of Rs.3000/- per month. 19 NGOs availed this scheme in 2000-01 and 66 NGOs availed this in 2001-02 (Government of Andhra Pradesh, 2002).
36
3.5 Information Technology and Media
The widespread availability and convergence of information and communication technologies (ICTs) - computers, digital networks, telecommunication, television etc., in India in recent years have led to unprecedented capacity for dissemination of knowledge and information to the rural population. Mass media and print media have been traditionally linked with extension programmes in India. The All India Radio and the Doordarshan (state run radio and television units respectively] transmit programmes on different aspects of agriculture every day. In the nineties, private TV channels like E-TV started telecasting daily programmes on agriculture. E-TV also telecast agricultural programmes in Telegu, Kannada and Marathi languages every day. Teja TV in Andhra Pradesh telecasts an on-line (live) phone in programme in collaboration with DoA and ANGRAU to answer farmers' questions every day. These programmes were found useful in making farmers aware about new seeds and other inputs and working practices.
Farm information units of the Central Ministry of Agriculture and the state Department of Agriculture have also developed several video programmes to facilitate the transfer of technology to farmers. The offices of the DoA, up to District level, are equipped with audio-visual equipment, such as, television sets, video cassette players, overhead projector, slide projector etc. Although videocassettes are often used for institutional training programmes, they have been rarely used for village level training programmes. Cassettes on new topics are not produced regularly, and therefore these facilities are not utilised to their optimum capacity. Project districts under the ATMA programme are presently equipped with the latest communication gadgets, such as, computers, multi-media, video cameras, scanners, digital video drives etc. As a result, some of the ATMAs have produced excellent Compact Discs on their programme components as well as success stories for further dissemination.
Newspapers (especially local language dailies) and farm magazines are important sources of information for farmers. Newspapers, especially those in local languages, provide at least one page every week for news and articles on different aspects of agriculture. Special farm magazines also reach a large number of farm households. However there is a wide variation among states in this regard and there is a lot of potential for using print media in those states and districts where the literacy levels are higher.
37
Several projects are now at tempting to provide information and services to ru ra l c i t izen-consumers , via human-media ted sys tems (Sood, 2001) . The village knowledge centres initiated by the MS Swaminathan Research Foundat ion (MSSRF) in Pondicherry a ims at bui lding a model for the use of ICTs in meeting the knowledge and information requ i rements of rura l families by taking into account the socio-economic context and gender d imension. (Box 9). Value addit ion to the raw information, use of the local language (Tamil) and mult i-media (to facilitate illiterate user part icipat ion) and par t ic ipat ion by local people from the beginning are the noteworthy features of the project. Local volunteers , mostly women, operate the centers . Creation and updat ing of relevant content to suit local needs is a key element of the p rogramme.
Box 9 : Village knowledge centres in Pondicherry
The MSSRF has set up knowledge centres in ten villages near Pondicherry in Southern India and have connected them by a hybrid wired and wireless network to enable the villagers to get information they need for farming or other activities. This involves local volunteers gathering information and feeding it into the intranet-type network and providing access through nodes in different villages. Ten villages are connected in a hub and spoke model, with Villianur, a small town 13 km west of Pondicherry, serving as the hub and value addition center. Most of the operators and volunteers providing information are women. Information provided in the village knowledge centres is locale specific and related to prices of agricultural inputs (such as seeds, fertilisers, pesticides), outputs (rice, vegetables, sugarcane), market entitlement (the multitude of schemes of the Pondicherry government), health care (availability of doctors and paramedics in nearby hospitals, women's diseases), cattle diseases, transport (road conditions, cancellation of bus trips) and weather (appropriate time for sowing, areas of abundant fish catch, wave heights in the sea), etc. Most of the information is collected and fed in by volunteers from the local community Itself. Much of the content has been developed in collaboration with the local people.
Prior to setting up the village knowledge centres, participatory rural appraisal was carried out in the hamlets, primarily to Identify the information needs of the community. PRA was also used to assess how far the community was willing to go in operatlonalislng the local centre, by way of making in-kind or cash contributions. PRA was also used in the identification of groups or individuals (who would be chosen by consensus by the community) for managing the local centre. Different villages have evolved their own ways of managing the centre. Some are located in public buildings, some in temples or in a private house. The volunteers were trained in PC operations and in using the data-cum voice network. An analysis of the users register, which is maintained in the village
38
centre, reveals that the propor t ion of women users varies from 34% to 50%. The propor t ion of use rs below the poverty line is on average 16%.
Source: 1. Balaji V (http://www.idrc.ca/telecentre/evaluatlon/nn) 2. Arunachalam S (http:/www.mssrf.org/informatlonvillage/ifla.html)
Mahila Spruthl is another project, similar to that implemented by the MSSRF which was initiated by Co-options Technologies Limited, a software solutions provider in Andhra Pradesh, to provide an integrated information system for women self help groups. Mahila Spruthi has been designed to establish Information Acquisition and Dissemination Centres (IDACs) at the gram panchayat level. IDACs are connected through dial up lines to various government, commercial and banking agencies for communication and transaction requirements of SHGs. The IDACs provide market information on the demand supply gap, best working and agricultural practices, branding and packaging, distribution avenues and price information (Rishi Kumar, 2002).
Samalkya Agri-tech Pvt Limited, a consultancy firm operating in Andhra Pradesh has been widely using the advances in IT to provide extension services tQ farmers. The technical officers in the field are connected to the subject matter experts of the firm at the district level through telephones and computers for providing technological back-up. The firm provides advice to those farmers registered with the firm on all aspects of farming ranging from crop production, diversification and marketing options.
Similarly the e-choupals of ITC as discussed earlier, depends on internet based IT application to implement its extension and procurement strategies. A number of internet sites have come up in recent years to support agricultural development in India. For instance, websites like ikisan.com, krishivihar.com, agriwatch.com and commodityindia.com provide information to farmers on production and market ing of agricultural commodities. The ikisan.com had so far established 100 internet kiosks in Andhra Pradesh. The Electronic Corporation of India Ltd (ECIL) along with ikisan.com is currently planning to establish 100 internet kiosks in 9 states under the Technology Mission on Cotton (Reddy, 2003). While ECIL would provide voice and other technical inputs, ikisan.com would play a major role in content development and training the technical personnel to manage the agribusiness portals. The Indian Farmers and Industries Alliance (IFIA) (a joint initiative of the Confederation of Indian Industry and Federation of Farmers Associations, Andhra Pradesh), is currently developing a portal "Farm GRID" to provide the farming community in Andhra Pradesh all needed information pertaining to 4-5 important crops grown in the state.
39
3 .6 Financial inst i tut ions
Financial ins t i tu t ions lending to agricultural sector provide advice and c o n s u l t a n c y to po t en t i a l b o r r o w e r s on f inancia l viabil i ty of the i r p roposa l s . All b a n k s involved in agricultural lending organise farmer meetings and semina r s every year. Banks also lend limited financial ass is tance to other organisat ions or state Depar tment of Agriculture for organising agricultural seminars and farmer meetings. Agri-consultancy services provided by the Canara Bank covers farm management , cold storage, agro-processing facilities, m e d i u m and small indust r ies and seed sector (Saravanan, 2001). The services include: project formulation and appra isa l , socio-economic survey, m a r k e t research , input supply s t u d i e s etc . The c l ien ts a re mos t ly c o m m e r c i a l f i rms, ag ro -based indus t r ies and other inst i tut ions. BASIX, a new generat ion financial institution established for the promot ion of sustainable livelihoods, have successfully demons t ra t ed the impor tance of an integrated provision of financial services and technical ass is tance for the ru ra l poor (Box 10).
Box 10 : Rural lending and livelihood promotion - A case of BASIX
BASIX is a group of financial services and technical assistance companies. Bharatiya Samruddhi Finance Limited, registered with the RBI as a Non-Banking Finance Company, is the main operating entity through which credit is delivered. Indian Grameen Services (IGS) is an NGO, registered as a Section 25, not for profit company, involved in providing technical assistance and support services to Samrudhi borrowers and other rural producers and institutions. The two are held together by BASICS Ltd, the holding company, through which initial equity investments were made in Samrudhi.
IGS, the BASIX's technical assistance and support service company, works in collaboration with various government, co-operative, non-governmental agencies, and private sector firms. IGS arranges farmer training in collaboration with the local agricultural extension staff, input supply companies and agri-business companies. The role of IGS in most of the cases is to identify the need for technical assistance, identify reliable suppliers and expertise and bring the two together. BASIX is operating in eighteen districts of five states in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Orissa and Jharkand. BASIX has professionals qualified in agriculture, engineering, management and social work and experienced in rural development, co-operatives, finance and banking. Since June 1996 to March 2003, BASIX has disbursed Rs. 1,135 million as loan.
Source: http://www.basixindia.com/introduction.htm
40
A vast majority of the borrowers of BASIX are the rural poor, particularly the landless and women. BASIX also lends to rural commercial farmers and non-farm en te rp r i se s , which generate much-needed wage employment for the rural poor. According to BASIX, credit is necessary, but not a sufficient condition for generating and sustaining livelihoods. Due to infrastructure disadvantages, remoteness from markets and lack of exposure of rural producers, it is necessary to extend technical assistance and support services for effective support/promotion of livelihoods in rural areas. There are many economic actors operating in the rural areas, who extend a variety of technical assistance to their customers as an integral part of their business. BASIX made conscious efforts to build up a network with some of these agencies for input supply, production enhancement and output marketing linkages. For example, seed production organisers provide technical advice to their customers on improved package of practices for cultivation, as higher seed production enhances his/her income. BASIX collaborates with such parties, as this makes provision of technical assistance much more sustainable.
BASIX has identified a few sub-sectors in its area of operation such as groundnut in Anantpur district, cotton in Adilabad district, vegetable in Mahboobnagar in Andhra Pradesh, Virudhnagar distrit in Tamil Nadu and Ranchi in Jharkand (Ramana, 2003). According to BASIX, the need to provide support for marketing their produce in today's context is equally important as helping farmers in increasing their productivity. Besides intervening in areas , which leads to direct increase in productivity or output, BASIX has been involved in finding out alternate market channels or value addition possibilities in these sub-sectors with an objective of raising the income of the primary producers. For instance, in Anantapur District, BASIX in collaboration with a local NGO, helped the groundnut producers to decorticate their pods and selling the kernel directly to wholesalers and oil mills. In Adilabad district, BASIX linked the cotton growers to spinning mills in Coimbatore for direct supply of ginned cotton. Farmers could increase income through a higher price realisation of produce and from additional employment generated. In Mehboobnagar District, BASIX in collaboration with Andhra Pradesh Dairy Development Co-operative Federation (APDDCF), enhanced milk production and procurement, through revival of milk societies and milk chilling centres, opening fresh milk route and provision of loan to dairy farmers. In Virudhanagar district of Tamil Nadu, it facilitated development of vegetable producer groups and federated them at a cluster level for collective marketing and also facilitated linkage with wholesale traders.
41
3.7 Consultancy
Farmers generally consult other relatively progressive farmers for information and advice related to production, post harvest management and marketing. Another major source of advice is the local input dealer. Some input firms such as AGROCEL and Tata Kisan Kendras provide free consultancy services. Emergence of paid extension services in agriculture is a relatively recent phenomenon. Many professionals after retirement from agricultural research institutions have been providing consultancy (free or paid) to farmers. Farmers often meet the travel expenditure or arrange a vehicle for the expert for field visits. In high value crops such as fruits and flowers, private consultancy services exist and they charge on an area basis during the season for which they make about 3-4 visits to advise the farmer on technical aspects. Farmers have also joined together in certain instances to avail the benefits of consultants. Exotic vegetable growers around Delhi have come together to hire professionals on a retainership basis. Similarly growers of grape, poultry, angora rabbits, mushroom have also joined collectively to hire technical, advisory and plant/cinimal protection services (MANAGE, 1993). At present big farmers, farmers growing commercial crops like coffee, tea, spices, flowers, grapes, etc., and those having large poultry units and dairy farms are availing consultancy services. The payment is made mostly based on acreage, period and sometimes based on number of visits.
Para technicians (those without professional degrees but trained in specific skills) do provide services, for a fee in the area of artificial insemination, grafting, etc and charge for the service. Similarly para extension workers promoted by DoA in states such as UF! Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh also provide limited extension services (message delivery and training) to fellow farmers in his village.
Nagarjuna Chemicals and fertilisers started farm management services during 1995 with the objective of providing integrated farm services at village level for a fee (per acre per season). The service covers several districts spread over Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. The company provides information, supply inputs and market the products to some extent . The service is suppor t ed by their website ik i san .com (Chandrashekara, 2002). PAJV Horti Consultants and Viji Hi-Tech are two consultancy firms in Coimbatore District of Tamil Nadu providing consultancy services on agriculture to commercial firms, agro-based industries and entrepreneur farmers (Saravanan and Gowda, 2002). Samikya Agri-Tech is another firm providing consultancy services to farmers in Andhra Pradesh. These initiatives could be classified as pure
42
consultancy services. But there are many other firms such as MSSL, Rallis and Nagarjuna Chemicals and Fert i l isers providing paid consultancy as part of a wide range of services.
One of the major constraints faced by farmers have been their inability to adjust the broad technological package (package of practices) to his/ her specific field conditions. The field level staff of DoA neither have the time, incentive or needed expertise to provide this very crucial technical support. Studies have shown that farmers are willing to pay for such services, especially in the area of plant protection and training programs (Sulaiman and Sadamate, 2000). However, it should be borne in mind that pay-worthy services are generally absent in India. The challenge is therefore in creating quality services to meet the increasing demand. The government can facilitate emergence of quality services through creation of new units within the DoA (agri-clinics/agri-poly clinics etc) or through strategic placement of its funds with other extension providers (contracting to NGOs and private extension service providers) or through facilitation of the emergence of private extension service providers. The scheme of "agri-clinics and agri-business centres" emerged in response to this increasing realisation.
3.8 Agro-processing and trading firms
Agro-processing and agri-trading firms often provide extension services as part of contract farming arrangement. Providing extension services help the firms in procuring adequate quantity of the needed quality and type of produce for processing or trading in high value markets. Quite often, these firms bring new technology to meet these standards and provide all services necessary to help the contract growers to adopt them.
In Punjab, Pepsi introduced new technology of deep chiseling and new methods of transplantation, besides introducing new seed varieties of tomato to meet the processing requirement of its processing plant in Punjab. The extension workers of the company remain in constant touch with the farmers and provide them advice on when, how much and which input to use (Singh, 2002). Extension staff is locally drawn by the firm and is accessible to all farmers at all times. Pepsi has used the expertise of its partners such as Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana and Punjab Agro Industries Corporation (PAIC) to make this contract farming arrangement a viable business proposition. Pepsi is now developing special citrus fruits for a big project to market Tropicana fresh fruit juices for Indian and foreign markets. The fruit saplings would be given to its contract farmers with technical support and an assured buy-back when the fruits are ready after four years (Baig, 2003).
43
Escorts Ltd, has entered into contract farming in Punjab and has already enrolled 4000 farmers with contracts for basmati, durum wheat, mentha and moong covering 23,000 acres. The company plans to set up Escorts Krishi Sansar which will be complete farmers supermarkets in leading mandi towns and apart from material requirements these will provide a network of services like advice on the effect of weather changes, types of soil and even banking (Baig, 2003). Punjab Agro Industries Corporation (PAIC) and Escorts are working together to promote contract farming in about 50,000 acres for basmati, oilseeds and durum wheat in Punjab during the year 2003-04.
AGROCEL implements Integrated Cotton Management (ICM) programme through pre-identified group of farmers. Farmers are advised to grow cotton in their fields following ICM and other organic practices. The raw cotton is purchased from them at a fair price, 8-10% more than the prevailing price. The cotton is then ginned, spinned and knitted and the fabric is stitched to T-shirts and AGROCEL markets the fabric and yarn at premium price in international markets (Pawar and Patel, 2002).
The company "Global Green" works in close co-operation with over 12,000 farmers who undertake contract farming primarily for producing gherkins and other products like baby corn. Global Green which is head quartered in Bangalore is the largest grower, processor and exporter of value added gherkins. The company provides all support to growers to cultivate this high value crop. Prime-Bio Products (India) Limited, based in Coimbatore is taking up long-term contract farming in cotton, maize and groundnut in Dharmapuram-Udumalpet tracts closer to Coimbatore (Gurumurthy, 2003). The contracts would be executed between farmers SHGs in the identified villages and Prime Farm Solutions (PFS), the company's farm service arm, which will be the nodal agency to run the contract farming. PFS arrange the bank credit and procure support services, such as inputs, crop care, insurance cover and marketing of harvested crop.
Similarly milk co-operatives and private milk processing companies (NESTLE, Punjab) do provide a large number of extension and other support services to milk producers. So is the case with sugar cooperatives and private sugar mills (eg: EID Parry, Tamil Nadu) that provide a range of extension services to its producers as part of its business and profit maximisation goal and also to sustain the goodwill of producers.
44
CHAPTER 4
FUNDING AND DELIVERING EXTENSION : Options and Experiences
Extension services are offered by very diverse organisations in the public and private sectors. Table 2 provides an overview of this emerging diversity.
Table 2 : Broad classification of extension service providers
Public and semi-public institutions
National extension organisations Local extension units Commodity Boards Universities and Research institutions International development organisations
Private profit-oriented actors
Consulting enterprises Processing/marketing enterprises Input supply enterprises Traders Private universities and research institutions
Private not-for-profit organisations
NGOs Religious organisations
Producer organisations Farmer associations and unions Commodity grower associations Community and village organisations
Source: Katz (2002)
4.1 Public and private goods
In a multi-institutional environment, it would be efficient for various actors to prioritise their activities based on the inherent strengths and weaknesses. Baxter (1987) observed that when a market is developing for skilled and specific agricultural advice, governments should reconsider its role in this market and evaluate its comparative advantage. It is normally sensible for a government to create conditions in which private suppliers of advice can emerge and flourish. This view has been supported by many others who have found merit in limiting the government role to only those activities that are not provided by the private sector. One approach used to decide who should provide what services is based on the classification of services according to its
45
economic character, using the principle of substractabi l i ty and excludability. ExcludabiUty applies, when access is denied to those who have not paid for the product, while substractability (rivalry) applies when an individual's use or consumption of a good or service reduces i ts availabil i ty to o t h e r s . Public goods are those having low substractability and excludability, whereas private goods are those having high substractability and excludability. Private firms are unwilling to supply services with public good characteristics because it is usually impossible to restrict the benefits only to people who pay for it (the free rider problem). Purely public and purely private goods occupy opposite ends of the economic spectrum. In between the two extremes are toll goods (low substractability and high excludability) and common-pool goods (high substractability and low excludability).
Figure 1 : Economic Classification of Agricultural Technology Transfer via Extension
Excludability Low High
Low Public Goods Toll Goods Pure agricultural information Pure agricultural information (long term): (short term): Cultural/production techniques Cultural/production techniques Farm management Farm management Market information Market information Information relayed through Specialised and /or client-mass media channels specific information
Substract Extension under contract ability farming ability
High Common Pool Goods Private Goods Modern technologies: Modern technologies: Self pollinated seeds Eg: new machinery, Commonly available/ agricultural chemicals, hybrid used inputs seeds, vet supplies and
pharmaceuticals *
Note: *niay Involve some externalities Source: Beynon, et al (1998). Beynon et al has adapted this figure from Umall and Schwartz, 1994
Some argue that public funds need not be invested in extension services, as market forces are capable of providing extension services. Others believe that market forces do not work in the public interest (market failures) and therefore investment in public funds in extension services
46
is justified. Examples of services in the public and in the private in teres t are given in Box 11 . But in practice the real issue is not the type of goods or fa rmers ' ability to pay for extension, bu t the way these goods are delivered and under what condit ions. Van den Ban (2000) a rgues that whether the extension function is public or private depends on the context in which it is used. In theory, advising farmers on the opt imal quanti ty of fertilizer is site and farm-specific, and therefore private, and chargeable. But, training farmers in the use of soil testing equipment is an educational function for which public funding may be justified. This difference is critical because by stepping back from the problem to its underlying cause, not only does the nature of the goods change but also the value of the information increases to the extent that it becomes empowering.
Box 11 : Examples of services in the public and iii the private interest
Services which result directly In increased profits of farm households (with the exception of very poor households) are largely In the private interest of the concerned household. Examples:
• Training in the production of commercial crops
• Assistance in the elaboration of a business plan to obtain credit
• Vaccination of livestoclt
Services which generate both, benefits in terms of prof it for individual farm households and benefltsfor a broader public, are of mixed interest. Examples:
• Training and coaching in the production of commercial crops for very poor farm households
• Promoting market integration of remote areas,
• Vaccination of livestock against highly contagious diseases,
• Economic and marketing innovations, and new forms of organisations, etc.
• Production Increases for export crops, which are taxed and thus contribute to fiscal resources of a country
Services which results mainly in benefitsfor a broader public nationally or internationally. Example:
• Promotion of sound pesticide use {reducing water pollution, pesticide residue in crops).
• Facilitating conservation of blo-dlversity or forest resources
• Production Increase in staple crops for national or global food security.
Source: Neuchatel Group (2002)
47
4 . 2 Separating funding from delivery
It is also not necessary that public interes ts can be met with only public funds . T h e r e a re m a n y ways t h rough which the benef ic iar ies can contr ibute to the financial sustainabil i ty of the extension service and can also to some extent exert influence on the quality of its provision. There is also considerable meri t in certain situations in channeling public funds to private extension providers . Based on a world-wide review of innovative approaches to financing extension, Katz (2002) synthesized the following key lessons (Box 12).
Box 12 : Eight key lessons on who should finance what in extension
• Market forces provide a range of extension services that have the characteristics of private goods and are purely privately financed without any public funding. These services tend to be for better-off farmers.
• Market forces do not work in the public interest in many extension situations. Services may have public good characteristics, be insufficiently profitable to be provided by market forces, have unwanted externalities when provided in accordance with market forces, etc.
• Market forces usually do not make extension services available in remote areas, for poor farmers and for the environment.
• The decision of who should finance what in extension should be guided by the public Interest attached to the services and actions rather than by theories about private and public goods.
• Perceptions of what is in the public interest are determined by beliefs. Therefore, the public interests recognised by a society are the result of political negotiation processes rather than scientific considerations.
• Without public funds for extension, substantial public interests are compromised especially those concerned with ecological sustainability and fighting poverty.
• In principle, people with an Interest in a service should contribute to financing it. This may be Individual farm families, private enterprises, communities, districts, countries or the global public.
• Extension services that are purely In the private or purely In the public Interest are rare. A mix of public and private funding should therefore finance most services.
Source: Katz (2002)
48
4 . 3 Privatisation
The word "privatisat ion" b road ly refers to a p r o c e s s by which the government reduces its role in an activity and encourages private sector to take up these roles (Box 13). Privatisation can take place broadly in two ways. One is dismantling, as the word indicates, staff are re leased and s t ruc tu re s are abandoned . The other is controlled privatisation, w h i c h is t h e c o n s c i o u s a n d m a n a g e d t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of p u b l i c organisations into, or their targeted replacement by private organisations.
Box 13 : Controlled privatisation-possible options
Governments can withdraw from the provision of service In a variety of ways. Marlam (1993) provides some of the alternatives that have been used in the process.
(i) Contracting- Contracting is now frequently considered to be one of the more feasible options for privatising the economies of the developing countries. This option is even more feasible when private companies prefer to act as contractors or concessionaries . Government may con t r ac t with non-prof i t , vo lun ta ry or neighbourhood organisations for some types of services.
(ii) Franchise agreements- Franchising is a privatisation method whereby government grants private entitles authority to provide a particular service within a specific geographical area. Users receive and pay for the service directly, but the government may monitor performance with respect to the franchise in terms of price, amount or level of service and quality. Franchising has great potential for achieving cost savings when applicable and properly implemented. The reason for this Is that franchising allows government to remove itself from the actual provision and delivery of a service.
(iii) Vouchers - Government provides certificates to eligible citizens requiring a particular service. The users are then free to exchange the certificate or vouchers for services from qualified private organisations that return the vouchers to local governments for reimbursement. The voucher alternative allows the user to choose among services and providers and generally means bet ter monitoring and quality control of services.
(iv) Self-Help- This privatisation alternative is the most underutilised. Under this approach, the government encourages individuals or groups to organise their own services, i.e., the individuals become their own clients. This alternative is designed to encourage Individuals to find solutions to their own problems to become more self-reliant, and to provide a service better tailored to local circumstances.
49
(v) Subsidy arrangements/grants- Government makes a financial or in kind contribution to private organisations to facilitate the provision of services at a reduced cost to consumers. The subsidy arrangements are often used for governmental activities such as public safety, health and human services and recreation.
4.4. Privatising extension
In many developed countries, the private sector became an important segment in the delivery of some of the extension services. The emergence of this situation and the increasing costs of extension delivery by the public sector forced the governments in developed countries to examine their role In the new environment. Governments responded in several ways, by limiting its role in providing extension services. Cost sharing with farmer groups and cost recovery for select services were initiated. The outcomes have been mixed.
The developing countries also started looking for alternative mechanisms for extension delivery mainly because of financial reasons. Though extension gave high returns to investments, the ability of the state to sustain present investment levels came under increasing stress. The declining credibility and poor image of public sector extension in developing countries also accelerated the search for other providers who can deliver extension services effectively and efficiently. Effectiveness of extension has always been constrained by inadequate operational funds. While partly agreeing to this, Baxter (1989) noted that while governments can be blamed for giving inadequate attention to extension, extension itself has often much to account for in this regard. He cited weak leadership of extension managers and lack of performance appraisal in the system as the main reasons for this poor image.
Through the process of privatisation, extension effectiveness is expected to improve by:
a. reorienting public sector extension with limited and well focused functions,
b. more number of extension providers (institutional pluralism) resulting from active encouragement by the public sector to initiate, operate and expand,
c. more private participation leading to the availability of specialised services hitherto not available from the public system,
d. user contributions to extension leading to improved financial sustainability, and
e. support and control by clients leading to client orientation.
50
Whether privatisation is the only means to achieve overall effectiveness and efficiency in extension can be further debated. Some have questioned the distributional impacts, the dependence on private providers would result in extension. Sulaiman and Gadewar (1994) based on a review of experiences from privatisation of extension in different countries lists major implications arising out of extension privatisation as follows: (a) contradictory message flow, (b) negative impact on sustainability, (c) sidelined educational role, (d) lesser contact between farmers and extension, (e) high cost of technologies, and (f) increase in regional imbalances. It is worth mentioning here that the public sector extension is not totally free from many of these limitations. Katz (2002) noted that reforms in public extension organisations such as decentralisation, transformation to independently functioning units, or the introduction of payment for services in the private interest and other cost-sharing agreements, coupled with capacity building for personnel, appear in general just as promising as privatisation.
4.5 International experiences with privatisation of extension
In the so-called developed economies, farmers have been paying for advice and information from private sector for decades, simply because these represented value for money in the particular circumstances of those farmers. In the UK, private sector providers flourished long before government took the first step towards divesting itself of its public sector advisory/extension services. Supply of private sector services grew in r e sponse to demand (Garforth, 2003) . Several coun t r i es have experimented with different forms of privatisation. Table 3 provides a quick glance at such initiatives.
Table 3 : Privatisation models in different countries
Country Case New Zealand Complete commercialisation of public extension The Netherlands Cost-recovery from farmers Germany Many models in different states: completely privatised, semi-
privatised, subsidised farmer association, voucher system China Contracting of subject-matter specialists by farmer groups Ecuador Share cropping between farmers and extension staff for a profit Costa Rica Voucher system, targeted as small-farmers to contract private extension Chile Sub-contracting and voucher system Ethiopia Privatised service centres Turkey Cost-sharing of advisors Kenya Extension associated with contract out-grower schemes
Source: Kidd et al (1988)
51
These exper iments were trying to shift either funding or delivery or both from public to private sector. While Nether lands shifted both funding and delivery of field extension services to a private venture company, Peru shifted funding and delivery of services entirely to non-governmental organisat ions . In Nether lands , a completely privatised advisory service h a s evolved. Originally the public sector shifted i ts technical staff to farmer organisat ion, b u t later th is staff was t ransferred to a private company, the DLV Adviesgroep Inc. Chile shifted only the responsibil i ty of extension delivery to private consultant firms. In Chile, the government cont inues to fund, b u t does not provide a public sector service to deliver extens ion for smal l f a rmers . Certified pr ivate c o n s u l t a n t s provide extension information on d e m a n d from farmers (Box 14).
Box 14 : Public funding and private delivery in Chile
The Chilean extension system has been based on service mandates to private extension companies for many years. In 1978, Chile began to provide vouchers to farmers, which they could use to purchase technical assistance from private extension enterprises. Supervision was supposed to be done by farmers themselves, and there was no financial participation from farmers. Further there were only a few service providers and farmers had no real choice. In the early years. It was observed that there was little Interest In the quality of services or whether they were addressing any real need. Because the extension firms had to enlist farmers to whom they would provide services as a pre-condition for bidding, they tended to take anybody who was ready to participate without considering whether the services offered could be of any use to these persons. The result was that many vouchers were submitted to the government with little or no extension at all having taken place. Initially no attention was given to training opportunities for the private enterprises to which extension service provision was contracted out. After some time it became clear that there were not enough well qualified extensionists to ensure the desired quality of services and cover the demand. Consequently INDAP (National Institute for Agricultural Development), the public Institution responsible for managing the service mandate system, took on the responsibility of offering training to the extension organisations. Better supervision mechanisms including outside control, support, training opportunit ies for service providers and Introduction of financial participation improved the situation.
Source: Katz (2002)
Many Lat in Amer i can c o u n t r i e s w i tnes sed m a n y s u c h changes in extension funding and delivery in the last two decades. In Peru the public sector largely re t rea ted from agricultural services in the early 1990s .
52
Public extension became limited to specific areas and programmes. The gap left was partly filled by donor-funded NGOs. Integrated service packages around commodity or crops offered by agri-enterprises and sometime producer organisations became more widespread, as well as services linked to credit and input sales. Better-off producers find their service needs largely satisfied, whereas small and medium producers only sometimes can get what they need (Heredia, 1999).
In Honduras, the public extension and the research system were dismantled in 1997. Many former government employees have been engaged by NGOs or have even founded their own NGOs, and are now implementing donor-financed research and extension activities. In Bolivia, public research and extension organisations were dismantled in 1998. Currently a new national research and extension system (Sistema Boloviano de Technologias Agropecurias, SIBTA) is being established, based on grant fund scheme through which public funds for agricultural innovations will be channeled (Katz, 2002).
In Guatemala, public extension was dismantled in the second half of the nineties. The dismissed local extensionists continued to act as informal sources of information for their own community. In some places NGOs, municipalities and local farmer organisations have taken up the extension role. In this process, the local farmer organisations have gained considerably in status and operational strength by having their own staff. Farmer organisations are now also better able to participate in decision making process at municipal and regional levels by not only expressing their views but also presenting technical proposals. But technical planning and orientation of their work is more problematic due to less guidance by and contact with professionals and external sources of information. Some farmer organisations gradually shifted from the higher educated and higher paid ex-government extension workers to staff from their own region with less formal education and training. This in the long term enhances the sustainability of the services by lowering the costs but in the medium term, may threaten the same since the lower educated staff lack the capacity to formulate new projects (marketing, credit or other services) that contribute to the income of the farmer organisations and attract additional external financial resources (Zeeuw, 2003).
In Colombia, public extension services have been decentralised to municipal level nearly a decade ago. The quality of services is reported to have rather deteriorated with decentralisation. Links to research have
53
weakened and poHtical interference by municipal author i t ies affects service quality. On the other hand , the extensionists are much more closer to the farmers and therefore are more aware of their needs and cons t ra in t s and can re spond to their real d e m a n d s . This is an aspect of quality which apparent ly has improved (Katz, 2002) .
In both East and West Africa, s t rong decentralisation processes are taking place. In a number of countries, the public extension services have shifted from the Ministry of Agriculture to the Ministry of Local Government and indeed through the decentral isat ion process to the dis t r ic ts . In Uganda, government is restr ict ing itself to funding while delivery has been t u r n e d to the private sector. What h a s been p u t in place is a separa t ion of funding (public) from delivery (private) and involvement of fa rmers in contract ing (Box 15). Mechanisms are in place to assure , a s m u c h a s p o s s i b l e , t h a t d u r i n g c o n t r a c t i n g a n d c o n t r a c t implementat ion, the interes ts of the poor are included and they too benefit (Silim, 2003) .
Box 15 : NAADS in Uganda
In Uganda, since 2000 a new institutional arrangement. National Agricultural Advisory Services (NAADS) has been put in place. NAADS was conceived as a mechanism to:
a. decentralise the services from the centre to districts and further down to lower administrative levels (sub-counties);
b. make the system farmer owned and farmer-driven and
c. make the services directly provided by private firms and Individuals
A farmer forum was created at each district, comprising farmers' representatives (drawn from registered farmer groups at sub-county level). The central government provides a grant to the District and this goes to the farmer forum for administration. The district employs a Coordinator for the service delivery who Is also responsible for compiling reports about the functioning of the programme. The farmer forum based on services demanded by the farmers in the groups, works out a tendering process through which the service providers are asked to bid for the services (these include technical information, skills through training, market Information). The farmer forum then awards a contract to the service provider, ensures that quality work Is provided by the service provider and pays this service provider. In effect therefore, it Is public funds that are used to pay for private extensionist.
During the design of this programme, consultations were done with farmers right up to sub-county levels In several districts. It was recognised
54
at design phase that farmers lack capacity to plan, contract, monitor and evaluate activities of the programme. For this reason, great emphasis has been put In farmer capacity building and farmer Institutional development right at the beginning. Capacity building of farmers Is being handled through sub-county MOUs by selected grass root NGOs. At the sub-county level, farmers through their farmer forum develop plans, select farmer enterprises and identify technology development needs etc. From the plans, the farmers own procurement committees constituted from farmer forum issue contracts for advisory services. NAADS has provided the means to farmers to achieve their goal by providing resources at sub-county level to contract advisory and research services from private sector.
Source: Sllim (2003); Fred {2003)
In most Sub Saharan Africa, private extension operates through export commodity chains and through some peri-urban NGOs and input supply companies. Experience with respect to private extension service is limited to cash crops, and in particular to the horticultural sector. Some big exporters have a large number of extension staff trained and hired by them who provide such services to the contracted small holders. The African experience has often been that private, commodity-based extension tends to exclude many of the poorer households (Drinkwater 2003).
These are examples from Kenya and Uganda of farmers paying for facilitators to hold Farmer Field Schools (FFS). Private extension services are feasible and do work where farmers or even pastoralists are organised in one form or another. The vet services are provided to even remote pastoralists in Kenya under the umbrella of Kenya Camel Association (KCA). Since even drug companies are members of the KCA and the pastoralists have an effective voice and have also received donor funds to support veterinarians to organise the services, this works extremely well. (Recke, 2003)
Indonesia decentralised extension several years ago, leading them to being perhaps more locally responsive, but certainly weaker overall. Without funds or central direction, extensionists have been drafted into performing other tasks, some of them only marginally related to extension (Mundy, 2003). Large companies run their own extension services. For instance, Nestle provides information and inputs to its contract milk producers in East Java as do vegetable contractors in the highlands of West Java and major shrimp producer in Southern Sumatra.
55
Even in those countries, with total or complete privatisation of extension, such as New Zealand, England and Wales and Netherlands, the government is subsidising indirectly by employing private service providers to meet broad public interest such as environment and food safety related services (Ghimire, 2003). Several countries have been employing contracting as a major strategy for extension provision. In Australia, the state government have fostered community organisations to prevent land degradation. This programme, popularly known as "landcare" has been a success. In United Kingdom, to achieve its policy goals for environment, food safety, and rural development as well as contracting private sector providers to deliver this public interest advice, it has felt the need to re-establish an in-house advisory capacity in the form of the 'Rural Development Service' (Garforth, 2003).
Extension services owned or managed by producer associations are quite common in industrialised countries. In Denmark and France for example, the main extension set-ups are operated by producer organisations. These services usually have a mixture of private and public funding, whereby the public/private ratio varies widely. Extension setups of producer organisations are relatively common also in developing countries, mostly with commodity producer associations. Support to broad-based farmer organisations including the establishment of their own extension services is becoming an increasingly common development intervention. In Uganda, district farmer associations are employing extensionists with the support of DANIDA. Financial sustainabihty of this arrangement is doubtful when the donor funds are reduced or withdrawn as the farmer associations have failed to generate enough resources to meet the contractual obligations of this arrangement (DANIDA, 2000).
In the German state of Thuringia, substantial financial participation was introduced in 1998. Before that, services were free. The result was a dramatic drop in demand, from around 80% of farms seeking advice at least once per year, to 13% of farms. Moreover half of these were very large farms. Nearly 90% of the very large farms utilised the services for payment, whereas less than 10% of the remaining small and medium farms did so (Currie et al, 2001). In Nicaragua, farmer groups can hire public extensions for specific services against payment. The extensionists were advised to search actively for farmers willing to utilise the services they offer for payment. They find such farmers, mostly in higher potential areas and among those who are relatively better off. Very poor farmers are rarely among their clients (Katz, 2002).
56
In Honduras, PASOLAC (Intercoperation) supports activities that foster sustainable land use practices in hilly areas. The service providers are private organisations. Financial participation in training and advisory services of around 10% was introduced on a pilot basis. This relatively small amount radically changed the relation between extensionists and farmers. The farmers really turned from poor beneficiaries to respected clients. This is illustrated by the fact that service providers have become punctual and more reliable, and offer services also on weekends and other times that are convenient for the farmers (Katz, 2002).
The fruit programme of INIAR a national public research institution in Ecuador, attempted to introduce financial participation for extension services related to fruit production. It however was unable to do so. The following likely reasons were identified: participation of farmers in defining the contents of the services was insufficient; the services offered were not sufficiently valuable for the farmers, because they were largely production related and did not respond to the main problems that related to marketing alternatives, small margins, irrigation and access to credit; transparency and preparation for the introduction of payment was insufficient; and the extension methodology was sometimes not adequate for the farmers (Schlotmann, 1997).
4.6 Lessons
Extension systems in several countries have undergone drastic changes in the last two decades. Many of these systems are still evolving. These changes have been primarily in response to:
a. increasing private sector involvement
b. declining ability of central and state government to fund extension and
c. changing paradigms of rural development emphasis ing decentralisation and greater client control and
d. the overall interest in providing farmers with improved extension services
There is an emerging consensus that though public funding for extension continues to be important for all countries (developed and developing), its delivery need not necessarily be through a public extension machinery. Contracting services to private extension service providers is a commonly adopted strategy. Ensuring farmer participation in contracting and
57
evaluating these contracted services would result in better accountability. Private extension service providers may also need training to enhance their capacity to organise their extension strategies to provide need based services of their clients. While some countries totally abolished their public extension machinery, public funding for extension still continue, but the delivery of services is routed through private service providers or through producer organisations. Providing funds directly to producer organisations for extension activities has a number of advantages. But their capacity to plan, contract, demand, monitor and evaluate services needs to be upgraded. Farmer organisation development should thus receive greater attention.
Several countries have decentralised their extension activity to district, sub-district and municipality levels with delegation of responsibility to fund and control extension organisation to local farmer groups. But special programmes to enhance the capacity of staff at these decentralised levels to access research support and other services and plan new programmes should be a part of the decentralisation strategy.
Extension by export firms and processing companies has been found to exclude many poor households and small farms. In most cases, only the large and medium farmers could take advantage of private extension service providers and paid public sector extension services. Small farmers could take advantage of these services only when they were organised into groups. This again highlights the need for developing strong and viable farmer organisations.
Commodity or crop specific approach to extension would not meet the needs of small producers and they need a broader kind support to improve their livelihoods. Understanding the complexities of their livelihoods and designing specific interventions to improve their income and reduce their vulnerability would require substantial public funding. Though some of these activities could be contracted out to private sector wherever they exist, the need for a core group of extension professionals in the public sector exist in all kinds of situations.
58
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS & POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The last two decades witnessed declining support for public extension, deteriorating quality of public extension service provision and the emergence of a wide range of private extension service providers. States have been responding to this situation in several ways. While the increasing private sector involvement needs to be encouraged and facilitated, efforts should be also made to reform public sector extension and enhance funding for extension. Unless rules and conventions associated with extension governance mainly related to recruitment, qualifications, transfers, contractual appointment, fund utilisation, performance assessment, stakeholder participation, partnerships, etc., are modified to meet the new realities, extension reforms would not make much difference. A core group of public extension professionals with diverse skills has to coexist even under an emerging pluralistic extension environment, to mainly address: information related to public interest; advise funding and delivery decisions; plan and implement needed interventions; support farmer organisation development; and facilitate information flow across different actors.
5.1 A new and vibrant public sector extension
India needs a new form of public extension that can quickly respond to the wide range of demands for information, technology and other support needs of farming community. This is especially important at this juncture, as the nature of Indian agriculture is changing and also due to the large number of small producers living in remote and disadvantaged regions which are weakly integrated into markets.
Changing nature of Indian Agriculture
India is a vast country with marked regional diversities in agro-climatic environment, resource endowment and population density. Agriculture (including cropping, animal husbandry, forestry and agro-forestry, fisheries and agro-industries) currently accounts for 24.7 % of the national gross domestic product (GDP) and provides employment to about 57% of the total work force. 78% of the land holdings are small (less than two hectares) and in 1991, they commanded only 33% of the
59
total net-cropped area. Though the four fold increase in foodgrain production (mainly from irriga-ted regions) during the last four decades improved the per capita availability of food, 26.1% of the population were living below the poverty line in 1999-2000. Poverty in India remains predominantly rural; three out of every four poor persons live in rural areas. Agricultural growth would continue to be an important strategy for increasing rural incomes.
Indian agriculture faces serious challenges because of ever-increasing population, limited land and water availability and degradation of natural resources. The national average yields of most commodities are low. In many areas there are limits to achievable increase in productivity, unless appropriate institutions that can help farmers to access information, inputs and services are strengthened, and joint action for natural resources management, marketing and processing are promoted. New opportunities (and threats) for trade in international (and domestic) markets have also added a new challenge for Indian farmers. Agricultural extension services (in the public as well as private sector) need to play a much larger role in assisting farmers in meeting the above challenges. Extension support must now address a broader range of aspects, including:
a. What technological options can be used profitably in his/her situation keeping in view the potential resource constraints in terms of land, capital, labour and knowledge ?
b. How to manage various technologies? (how to make optimal use of inputs on the farm?)
c. How and when to change farming systems? (diversifying from crop production to mixed farming or vegetable or animal production)
d. For which type of products is there a good demand in the market?
e. What are quality specifications for the produce and how to achieve them? (e.g.: for export markets, organic farming)
f. How, when, where, and under what conditions to buy inputs and sell products?
g. How to ensure equitable access to resources?
h. How to make decisions collectively on resource use and marketing?
i. How to find quickly the most relevant and reliable knowledge and information?
60
j . What are the feasible off-farm income generation options available for members of the farm family and how could they depend on them?
k. What are going to be the implications if input subsidies are phased out and or if the trade in agricultural products is liberalized? (van den Ban, 1998)
Though many of the above mentioned aspects have been always relevant, public sector extension has been mainly focusing on the dissemination of production technologies, but this approach is no longer sufficient. The current priorities of Indian agriculture includes, conservation of soil, water and bio-diversity; diversification to horticulture; value added products; development of rural infrastructure and agro-enterprises; and creation of employment in rural areas (Department of Agriculture and Co-operation, 2002a). To make good decisions, farmers need information from different sources and often need help to integrate the information. Due to its sole dependency on knowledge and information mainly from SAUs and ICAR institutes, public sector extension continues to provide information only on technologies generated in these research stations and passed on to farmers. The emphasis continues to be on food grains, though broad basing of agricultural extension (including messages for other crops/enterprises) is an accepted philosophy. Public extension should give increasing attention to access and integrate information and expertise from a wider range of sources (e.g., private sector laboratories, farmers, NGOs, processors, market analysts, traders, and consumer groups), to meet the changing needs of farmers. This is especially important in the Indian context, as it is virtually impossible for the majority of small farmers in the country to contact the different organizations to obtain all this information.
Extension for small producers and disadvantaged areas
The small producers and those living in the remote and disadvantaged areas of India are served poorly by public as well as private extension. Reduced public funding, deteriorating quality of public extension and the increasing reliance of the government in private extension may further worsen the situation for these groups of producers.
Despite the perennial weaknesses confronting the state DoA {viz, diminishing operational support and poor technical background of the majority of its employees), the Village Extension Worker of the DoA is still one of the important sources of information for Indian farmers (Sulaiman and Sadamate, 2000), though DoA information is clearly
61
targeted to grain production, visits are irregular, and the service is preoccupied with implementation of public sector schemes linked to distribution of subsidies and subsidized inputs. Farmers' dependence on other farmers and input dealers as a source of information continues to be high. The main extension function performed by the state Department of Agriculture (DoA) is the delivery of technical messages to individual farmers or farmer groups through visits to specific locations in his circle/area. In the more remote and difficult areas, the DoA has considerable difficulty in recruiting and retaining field staff and often, these areas witness large number of vacancies and frequent staff turnover. Filling vacant posts alone would not help much. Nor handing over the DoA activities to NGOs or employing para workers to implement only the DoA agenda (of implementing a large number of central and state programmes and transfer of technical messages for increasing crop production) would meet the diverse requirements of farmers.
In many areas, mere dissemination of technical messages to increase agricultural productivity do not make much sense as the farmers overriding concern is in increasing their income through a number of farm and non-farm options. Extension can (if organised well) and should address the concerns of the poor. In addition, the changing rural development agenda now demand that extension plays a major role in reducing the vulnerability of the poor (Christoplos et al, 2000; Berdegue and Escobar, 2001). Solutions for reducing vulnerability rarely lie in the transfer of production technologies as such, but often in improved access to information on wider livelihood choices and institutional support (such as micro-finance, micro-enterprises, entrepreneurship development, market access, etc). Extension needs a higher level of flexibility and wide range of expertise to assist the poor with these various options (Sulaiman and Holt, 2002). Decentralising extension planning would certainly help provided the districts have adequate expertise to meet the location specific needs for extension support and freedom to outsource this requirement from elsewhere. This would require:
a. a strong commitment by public extension to provide a wider support to improve livelihoods in partnership with other actors in the rural development sector,
b. a clear shift in policy for decentralising extension to district and block levels,
c. intensive HRD efforts to enhance the capability of staff at these levels to develop, implement and evaluate innovative extension progrcimmes,
62
d. designing interface mechanisms (such as Farmer Advisory Committees) to ensure participation of stakeholders in planning, implementing and evaluating extension interventions and
e. operational autonomy to generate and utilise resources within a broad financial framework and freedom to hire short-term consultancy inputs and recruit staff on contract.
Private extension service providers could be potentially attracted to serve the needs of farmers in difficult areas. Options include:
a. identifying all extension actors in a dis tr ict and their (geographic as well as programme) areas of intervention,
b. developing joint programmes (with varying levels of public-private support),
c. developing need based HRD programmes to meet the capacity of various actors for working together and providing services,
d. public sector extension contract private service providers to provide specific services,
e. fund producer organisations to support them in contracting needed services from different extension providers and
f. public extension to focus on group formation and support these groups till they are capable of identifying needs and evaluate quality of assistance.
5.2 Promoting private sector involvement
Many of the private extension initiatives in India emerged without any active state support. Quite often they emerged in response to deficiency in public extension service provision. The state provided an enabling environment and in certain cases support to nurture them. State and donor funding to NGOs facilitated their spread to more areas and initiation of a number of activities. Promotion of agri-clinics and agribusiness centres is an activity that the Central Government is currently investing in a big way. This is expected to increase the number of qualified and well-trained private extension entrepreneurs. Tax incentives to business firms for an investment in rural development is another commonly used method. Creation of an enabling environment by the state for large scale promotion of contract farming and market operations by the private sector as done in states such as Punjab and Tamil Nadu has increased private participation in extension activities. An inter-Ministerial
63
Task Force of the Ministry of Agriculture has recommended amendment to the Act dealing with Agricultural Produce Marketing Committees (APMC) by s ta tes for suppor t i ng regis tered cont rac t farming programmes. Placing public funds with farmer organisations, local governments or NGOs to organise extension activities needs more active consideration. Contracting private sector to offer need-based services would also lead to emergence of more private providers and would also bring more competitiveness and thereby improve quality of services.
Contract farming arrangements are more prominent in states and districts with good infrastructure, especially the road network, as this facilitate quick transport of produce for processing and marketing. Public investments in creation of durable road infrastructure would facilitate private sector involvement in establishing backward and forward linkages leading to better post-harvest management and higher value addition in many more areas. Similarly improvements in supply of power and storage infrastructure would also facilitate wider private sector involvement.
Apart from facilitating private sector entry, the government also has to monitor and evaluate the performance of private sector. Legal mechanisms, which could mediate and settle disputes need to be developed. This would also go a long way in building a transparent and credible business environment for private sector operation. The activities need to be monitored and evaluated based on objectives of the contract, violations of contract by either party, extent of client satisfaction etc. Monitoring and Evaluation, conducted in participation with different stakeholders, should also focus on potential impact of newly introduced technologies, sustainable natural resource use, environmental and public health impact and conduct of transparent business practices.
5.3 Public - private partnerships
There is an increasing realization that public extension by itself cannot meet the specific needs of various regions and different classes of farmers and policy environment will promote competitive private and community extension to operate effectively, in roles that complement, supplement, work in partnership and even substitute for public extension (DAC, 2000). Private participation in extension is not uniform across the country. In some districts, a number of private organizations work in isolation providing diverse services but there is as yet no inventory of these firms at the district level, which would allow contact to be made and possible alliances forged. Some of the ATMA districts have developed an inventory of private sector extension providers.
64
Madhya Pradesh became the first state in the country and perhaps the only state in India to have a private extension policy. The policy states that "the private extension would aim for cost reduction, improving the efficiency of extension system and inculcating accountability in extension services. This would be implemented in two phases. In the first phase, focus is on introduction of partial private extension services through building up private-public partnership in agricultural extension. During the second phase, which will take place gradually in long term, the focus would be on substitution of public extension by private extension" (Government of Madhya Pradesh, 2001).
Though public-private partnerships in extension has been finding acceptance at the policy level, the level of preparedness of public sector agencies to work in a multi-institutional environment has been highly inadequate. The GO-NGO collaboration experiment for sustainable agricultural development implemented in Rajasthan revealed a number of i ssues that emerged when government and non-governmental organizations were brought together to work in a collaborative mode, including the pervasive perception in government that NGOs should merely be contracted to provide services, but a perception among NGOs that their strength lies more in mobilizing people to make demands on the system (Alsop et al 1999). In Madhya Pradesh, there has not been a shared understanding on the need and importance of partnerships among the DoA staff. The lower management level staff, especially the field level workers have not been very appreciative of this new initiative.
There is a need to educate the public sector staff at the district and block levels; on the importance of partnerships. Partnership by definition requires sustained efforts over time for building and maintaining good working relationships. As a first step, a series of activities to inculcate the right attitude for building close working relationships with other organizations needs to be arranged for extension managers. Case studies based on real documentation from examples of successful partnerships disseminated between regions would also act as a springboard for discussiion around the concept, operation, pitfalls and potential of partne]-ships. Capacity development efforts would make significant difference, only if it is done in tandem with tackling "governance" issues mentio ned earlier. Ability and willingness to work in partnership with other groups and organisations should essentially become a part of performance assessment and stakeholder evaluation.
65
5.4 Changing "mindsets"
Use of the term "privatization" has created confusion amongst public extension personnel. Often the meaning of the word is perceived as "abolition of the public sector and transferring all activities to the private sector". In a workshop organised by the DAC (18-19 January, 2001) to elicit views of the government of various states on the draft Policy Framework on Agricultural Extension, several states expressed strong reservation to the idea of private participation in extension. The reasons given are: the profit motive of the private sector; lack of ability of farmers to pay; lack of effective private sector; and the need to preserve the 'authenticity' of agricultural research derivable only from an 'impartial' public sector.
The fact that privatization is an umbrella term covering several options (Box 13) to improve efficiency and effectiveness has not been fully appreciated, and the mixed impact of privatization strategies adopted internationally, further impedes the adoption of such a strategy. Individuals, organisations, farmers and the political system resist change and this huge inertia can't be ignored. Attempts to address the real and imaginary fears of the different stakeholders should be a part of the change management process.
Though private sector participation in extension in India is currently limited to only a few crops and geographical areas, the increasing number of private entities, such as NGOs, farmers' associations, producer cooperatives, input agencies, agro-processors (especially for contract growing schemes), private consultants and the media offer much scope for supplementing and complementing public sector extension. As farmers are also willing to pay for value-added services, the challenge is to create quality services so that partial cost recovery can commence. In an increasingly complex environment , there are a number of responsibilities, such as the designated public goods, which remain the domain of the public sector, though in reality the boundary between public and private goods is not as clear as the literature suggests. For these services to be funded primarily from the public purse does not necessar i ly requ i re them also to be delivered through publ ic infrastructure. The more the institutional pluralism grows, the greater the need within the public sector for clear mission statements, goals and strategies so that privatisation options are used to best advantage.
66
5.5 Financial participation and willingness to pay
Financial participation of clients even if it is small, results in improving the quality of services, provided clients can influence decisions related to quality and delivery of services. Though the poor have relatively little ability to pay for services, studies have shown that they would be more than willing to pay, if the value of the service could be convincingly shown to them.
In a study conducted among 720 farmers from three states of India, Sulaiman and Sadamate (2000) found that about 48% of farmers expressed willingness to pay for agricultural information. Farmers' willingness to pay has not been uniform across producers. Farmers having higher total area and higher area under non-food grains were more willing to pay for better quality agricultural information. The demand is more for quality extension services in the area of plant protection and training programs. One important condition for payment for advice is that it should be based on visit to his field. Farmers as a group are also willing to share the costs for bringing expert advice. The willingness to pay was more for services in non-foodgrain crops, especially, horticultural crops (fruits, vegetables, flowers and spices) and oilseeds.
Ahuja and Punjabi (2001) based on a survey covering 110 households in Gujarat have found that a large majority of farmers, even the small and marginal farmers, are willing to pay for extension services. Farmers were willing to pay an amount of Rs.250-300 per household per year for extension services. Some of the private entrepreneurs who have established agri-clinics have been charging an annual fee of Rs. 150/ha/ year for advice and regular visits to fields. Agri-business companies such as Rallis and Mahindra have been charging Rs. 100 - 500 per acre I>er season for integrated technical services (including extension services) to farmers.
Considerable scope exists for initiating paid extension services in agriculture. What is needed is the ability to develop quality services and innovative business models that allow cost recovery possible. Poor producers can take better advantage of the paid services if they are organised into groups and the group pays for services provided to its members. DoA and other agencies in the public sector should initiate problem-solving consultancy services and need-based training programs, especially in, non-foodgrain crops. To begin with, these services could
67
be provided at the district or sub-district level by pooling the expertise of more qualified and trained personnel available with the DoA and the SAUs. The fees collected could be a potential source of funds for the DoA to meet its declining operational funding.
However, it should be borne in mind that pay-worthy services are generally absent in India. The challenge is therefore in creating quality services to meet the increasing demand. The government can facilitate emergence of quality services through creation of new units within the DoA or through strategic placement of its funds with other extension providers. Ensuring financial participation doesn't mean that extension should completely depend on private or user funds for its existence. The target should be to recover at least the operational costs of providing the service. Financial participation needs to be seen more as an accountability enhancing mechanism and not purely as a mechanism to reduce costs. It would be worthwhile to do a financial and organisational management review of the DoA to understand how better the finances of the DoA could be improved. Resources could be potentially generated through selling the services of DoA to other agencies, developing joint (public-private) proposals for funding, replacing the low qualified field staff with a small core group of better qualified staff with wider expertise and enhanced operational funding.
5.6 Application of information technology
Information Technology (IT) has much to contribute to improving the efficiency and effectiveness of extension systems. The spread of Internet has created considerable interest in 'cyber extension'. The excitement generated by internet technologies has tempted many to consider opening more Information Kiosks (or IT parlours), and to develop on-line connectivity to ICAR and SAUs, to compensate for the weaknesses of public extension. But, it should be noted that IT is a useful complement to but not a substitute for field extension. Research has clearly shown that information supplied through the media is helpful only in the initial stages of technology adoption and a more detailed interaction is required in the later stages of adoption process. Furthermore, poor infrastructure, high levels of illiteracy and absence of software in local languages constrains the usefulness of IT for vulnerable farmers. But human mediated computer systems shared among multiple users of a rural community could infact prove to be the most inexpensive and inclusive form of rural infrastructure possible today (Sood, 2001). Conversely, IT has a lot of potential for improving the quality and competence of the
68
R-E system and for providing greater access to market information (through net-working of markets) and far more attention needs to be given to this aspect.
5.7 Towards Extension-Plus
Some of the emerging private sector extension initiatives mentioned in this document have been successful, as they developed a system that provided an integrated package of services to farmers. For instance, for MSSL, extension means delivery of a wide range of services that takes care of all the system deficiencies in farming, namely: poor quality inputs and their unavailability at the right time; low productivity; low prices; too many market intermediaries; and lack of proper field visit based advice on technology use. Similarly Rallis, through a wide range of partnership with different agencies, provide an integrated service to farmers through one point, Rallis Kisan Kendra. Most of the contract growing schemes has been also trying to provide technical and nontechnical services to farmers as a package. Similarly for BASIX, extension means, linking primary producers to processors, promotion of value addition at the local level and linking producer groups to other institutions in addition to providing technical support and credit. This kind of extension that could successfully expand its scope beyond the conventional role of technology dissemination could be termed as extension-plus (Sulaiman and Hall, forthcoming).
Examples of such innovative institutional arrangements of Extension-plus have been rare in the public sector. Kerala Hor t icul tura l Development Programmes could perhaps be an exception. For KHDP extension meant development and strengthening of farmer organisations; improving farmers' abilities to find solutions to technical, credit related and marketing problems; assisting sourcing better technical knowledge available with other organisations; and strengthening the capability of farmer organisations to negotiate with the state, traders and banks for changes in policy and practice that provide better opportunities for farmers. Diversified Agricultural Support Project (DASP) in Uttar Pradesh (and Uttaranchal) has been trying to provide a wide range of support to farmers. The success has been limited, primarily due to implementation of the programme through existing line departments that have an organisational culture, not conducive for implementing innovative programmes. The underlying principles of extension-plus include a broad scope of service provision; the extensive use of partnerships to fulfill and expanded mandate, a learning based approach
69
and negotiations with wide range of stakeholders for developing workable and effective arrangements in line with specific circumstances and objectives, and larger degree of accountability to client groups.
5.8 Public sector reforms-current status
The need to reform public extension service in India has been a part of the policy rhetoric for the last few years. The national agricultural policy (NAP) emphasises the need for broad basing and revitalisation of the extension system. It also calls for regionalisation of agricultural research, strengthening research-extension linkages and bringing innovative and decentralised institutional changes to make the extension system farmer-responsible and accountable (DAC, 2002a). Several innovations to improve the delivery of extension services were also introduced in several states (Table 1) with mixed outcomes. Some elements from the "privatisation basket" were also introduced in different states. For instance, measures to initiate private and NGO sector participation in extension programmes have been tried. The idea of public-private partnerships in extension is getting slowly accepted. Attempts to recover partially some of the costs have also been attempted. Cost of services such as soil testing and inputs distributed as part of various programmes are currently recovered at least partially. For participation in training programmes, a fee is charged to meet the operational costs involved.
States currently have the freedom to propose new need based and relevant projects for availing central assistance under the new macro-management mode. (Earlier, they were forced to implement several centrally sponsored projects with uniform implementation guidelines, to obtain assistance, irrespective of its relevance for a particular region). State level training organisations are getting re-organised with more autonomy. The central government support to state extension in the X Plan would depend on the state initiatives on taking three reforms forward in the State Work Plans, namely public sector reforms, promotion of private sector initiatives and promotion of media and IT applications. How far the states would go along this reform path is yet to be seen.
5.9 Implementation realities
Though the Policy Framework for Agricultural Extension of the Government of India (Annexure 1) makes some of the right type of indications for reforming extension, it underplays crucial implementation problems of introducing reforms (Sulaiman and Hall, 2002).
70
Firstly, as extension performance is still judged in technology adoption terms, the prescriptions for its reform continue to predominantly focus on improving the efficiency of dissemination. Secondly, because extension is administered as a centralised hierarchy, (at the centre and state levels) reform guidelines are both centrally generated and universal. The consequence being that the institutional innovations necessary to produce new, locally generated organisational forms are likely to be stifled by blueprints and targets for uniform implementation of programmes. Centralised financing and accompanied monitoring and evaluation, also restricts the need to develop local accountability. A related element of this is that both national and donor agencies have been eager to commit substantial funding for major programmes, but have been reluctant to make modest investments in the systematic institutional evaluation of earlier programmes to draw out generic principles that govern the relative success of particular programmes. Current proposal to extend the ATMA and KVK models across all the districts in the country is a classic example of this syndrome.
Thirdly, because the understood role of extension is highly restricted, even where reform prescribes training, there is no recognition of the need to develop the skills to innovate (technologically and institutionally) and generate new location specific approaches. Fourthly, it is not just the public extension system that needs reform. A new (and much required) relationship with public agricultural research organisations can not emerge until they too undergo considerable institutional change. The same is true for a broader set of public agencies allied to rural development.
To meet the emerging challenges, extension needs to overcome the constraints imposed on it by the conventional understanding of its role and function. The reforms suggested in the PFAE will not by themselves reinvent Indian agricultural extension unless they are accompanied by a much more explicit agenda of institutional learning and change for the public agencies involved. The organisational culture prevailing in the public sector constrain adoption of these approaches and extension reforms should first address these issues. This include: rigid hierarchy and centralised modes of planning; a tradition of assessing performance in terms of technology adoption; a history of rewarding only success and thus a reluctance to report and analyse reasons of failure; a history of working independently and a mistrust of other agencies; and a tradition of upward accountability for resource utilisation rather than output achievement and client satisfaction. Moreover it also needs a culture of learning and reflection.
71
5.10 Conclusions
There is an important role for public sector extension in India, but it needs to re-Invent itself to meet the emerging challenges. It needs to play a much-expanded role and has to work in partnership with a wide range of organisations (including private sector) at the local level. Extension should ideally play the role of a bridging organisation linking the different sub-systems of the bigger innovation system. These arrangements have to be devised locally and should evolve over time.
Sufficient autonomy needs to be provided for extension agents and others to experiment with new ways of working. Learning skills often need to be developed through explicit capacity building programmes. Capacity development should also focus on strategic leadership, programme and process management, networking and linkages. Efforts should be also made to promote widely the principles behind successful approaches implemented within and outside the system. Change management process needs to be facilitated and sufficient opportunities need to be provided for collective learning so that the different partners own the change and would reinvent strategies that suit the local situations.
Private initiatives in extension need to be promoted, facilitated and monitored. An inventory of all organisations working for agricultural and rural development in a district should be prepared as a first step. Regions not sufficiently attended by the public and private sector need attention and special programmes in partnership mode have to be developed for these regions. Public extension needs expertise to develop programmes and flexibility to implement them. Farmer organisation development should be a priority for public sector extension. Farmer SHGs and interest groups need technical, organisational and managerial support in the initial years, if they have to evolve into viable economic organisations.
Extension should also be in a position to understand the implications of the new challenges, new ways of engaging with these challenges and how to negotiate and influence the decisions of other organisations. This should be a part of the capacity building. The focus should be on how extension can facilitate change. Capacity building of all extension providers should receive priority funding during the transition phase. Extension needs funding and support from farmers as well as all others who have a stake in agricultural and rural development. There are a number of innovative funding and delivery mechanisms available and experimentation with these models should receive more attention.
72
REFERENCES
Ahuja, V and Meeta Punjabi (2001). In search of a new paradigm for agricultural extension In India, CMA Monograph Series No 195, Centre for Management in Agriculture, Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad.
Alex, A.; Zijp, W. and Byerlee, D (2002). Rural Extension and Advisory Services- New Direction, Rural Strategy Background Paper No 9, The World Bank, Washington, D.C.
Alsop, R.; Gilbert, E.; Farrlngton, J. and Khandelwal, R. (2000). Coalitions of interest: Partnership for process of agricultural change, Sage Publications, New Delhi.
Arunachalam, S. (2002) Reaching the unreached: How can we use ICTs to empower the rural poor In the developing world through enhanced access to relevant information?, Paper presented at the IFLA General Conference, Glasgow, 18-24 August.
(http://www.mssrf.org/lnformatlonvillage/ifla.html)
Balg, M.A. (2003). Spoils of Plenty-Punjab Agriculture, SWAGAT, July 2003.
Balajl, V. Knowledge System for Sustainable Food Security
(http://www.idrc.ca/telecentre/evaluatlon/nn)
Baxter, M. (1987). Emerging priorities for developing countries in agricultural extension, In Rivera, WR. and Schram, S.G. (eds) Agricultural Extension Worldwide: Issues, Practices and Emerging Priorities, Croom Helm, New York,
Bennet, C. (1992). A new Interdependence model-Implications for extension education. University of Illinois, Office of International Agriculture, Interpaks Digest, Vol I, Fall 1992
Berdegue J.A., and German Escobar (2001). Agricultural Knowledge and Information System and Poverty Reduction, AKIS Discussion Paper (Jan 2001) The World Bank, Washington D.C.
Beynon, J.; Stephen Akroyd, Alex Duncan and Stephen Jones (1998). Financing the Future-Options for Agricultural Research and Extension in Sub-Saharan Africa, Oxford Policy Management, UK
73
Bloom, PD. (1991). The changing social contract for agricultural research and extension. Address to the Australian Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Brisband, AlAS, No 341, October 1991.
Chandrashekhara, R (ed) (2002). Private Extension: Indian Experiences, National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management, Hyderabad.
Christoplus, 1., John Farrington and A.D Kidd (2000). Extension, Poverty and Vulnerability, Inception Report of a study for the Neuchatel Initiative', Working Paper, 144, Overseas Development Institute, U.K.
Coutts, J. A (1995). Agricultural extension policy as a framework for change, European Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, Vol 2(1)
Currie, J., Hoffman V. and Kidd.A.D (2001). Contracting for Agricultural Extension in Thuringia, Germany, Case Study on the World Bank AKIS website (www.worldbank.org)
DANIDA (2000). Technical Review Report on Ugandan National Farmers Association.
DAC (2000). Policy framework for agricultural extension (draft). New Delhi: Extension Division, Department of Agriculture and Co-operation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.
DAC (2002a). National Agriculture Policy, Retrieved May, 2002 from
http://agricoop.nic.in/agpolicy02.htm.
DAC (2002b) Expenditure Finance Committee Memorandurh for Central ly S p o n s o r e d Scheme-Suppor t to the Sta te Extension Programmmes for Extension Reforms, Department of Agriculture and Co-operation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.
Drinkwater, M. (2003). Contribution to the e-mail discuission on "Prospects and Limitations of Private Extension Delivery" sponsored by Agricultural Research and Extension Network of Overseas Development Institute, UK (March 10-21, 2003).
Farrington, J., Sulaiman, R.V and Pal, S. (1998). Improving the effectiveness of agricultural research and extension in India; An analysis of institutional and socio-economic issues in rainfed areas. Policy Paper 8, New Delhi: National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research.
74
Fred, K. (2003). Contribution to the e-mail discussion on "Prospects and Limitations of Private Extension Delivery" sponsored by Agricultural Research and Extension Network of Overseas Development Institute, UK (March 10-21, 2003).
Garforth, C and Jones, G.E. (1997). The history, development and future of agricultural extension. In Swanson, B.E, Robert RBentz and Andrew J Sofranko (eds) Improving Agricultural Extension-A Reference Manual, Food and Agriculture Organisation, Rome
Garforth, C. (2003). Contribution to the e-mail discussion on "Prospects and Limitations of Private Extension Delivery" sponsored by Agricultural Research and Extension Network of Overseas Development Institute, UK (March 10-21, 2003).
Ghimire, B. P. (2003). Contribution to the e-mail discussion on "Prospects and Limitations of Private Extension Delivery" sponsored by Agricultural Research and Extension Network of Overseas Development Institute, UK (March 10-21, 2003).
Gill, D.S. (1991). Economic Returns to Expenditure on Agricultural Extension Systems, J. of Extension Systems, 7:44-61.
Government of Andhra Pradesh (2002). Agriculture Action Plan 2002-03, Department of Agriculture, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad
Government of Madhya Pradesh (2001J. Proceedings of the Workshop on Private Extension Potential in Madhya Pradesh (August 24, 2001), Department of Agriculture, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal
Government of Uttaranchal (2002). 150 days oj Project Management Unit (PMU), Rural Development Department, Secretariat, Dehradun,-Uttaranchal
Gurumurthy, G. (2003). Prime Bio to take up contract farming in Tamil Nadu, The Hindu Business Line, June 26, 2003
Haug, R. (1999). Some leading issues in international extension, a literature review. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, Vol 5, No.4
Heredia, J.A. (1999). Impactos de las poli t icas de invetigaclon agropecurias sobre processos de ionnovacion en casos seleccionados del Peru, PROAPA-GTZ, Lima, Peru, Quoted from Katz, E (2002)
75
Innovative Approaches to financing extension for agricultural and natural resource management-Conceptual considerations and analysis of experience. Lindau: Swiss Centre for Agricultural Extension.
ICAR (1998). National Agricultural Technology Project; Man Document, New Delhi: Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi
IIML (2003). Annual Monitoring and Evaluation Report (January-December 2002), National Agricultural Technology Project-Innovations in Technology Dissemination Component, Agricultural Management Centre, Indian Institute of Management, Lucknow.
Katz, E. (2002). Innovative Approaches to financing extension for agricultural and natural resource management-Conceptual considerations and analysis of experience. Lindau: Swiss Centre for Agricultural Extension.
Kidd, A., John Lamers and Valker Hoffman (1988). Towards Pluralism in Agricultural Extension-A growing challenge to the public and private sectors. Agriculture + Rural Development Vol (1)
Krishnan, A.(2003). Contribution to the e-mail discussion on "Prospects and Limitations of Private Extension Delivery" sponsored by Agricultural Research and Extension Network of Overseas Development Institute, UK (March 10-21, 2003).
Lundwall, B. A. (ed) (1992) National innovations System- Towards a theory of innovation and interactive learning, Pinter, London
Macklin, M. (1992). Agricultural Extension in India, World Bank Technical Paper 190, World Bank, Washington D.C.
MANAGE (1993). Farmers Participation in Agricultural Research and Extension Systems, National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management, Hyderabad, India
MANAGE (2002). Agriculture to Agripreneurship: Success stories of Agripreneurs, National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management, Hyderabad.
MANAGE (2003a). ViJay Gaatha ojAgripreneurs. National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management, Hyderabad.
76
MANAGE {2003h).Indian Agripreneur, Vol 1(5) National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management, Hyderabad
Mariam, T. H. (1993). Privatisation-Alternative Approach to develop and sustain veterinary services in Ethiopia, M.Sc Agricultural Extension Disse r t a t ion , Agr icul tura l Extens ion and Rural Deve lopment Department. Reading University, Reading UK
Mundy, P (2003). Contribution to the e-mail discussion on "Prospects and Limitations of Private Extension Delivery" sponsored by Agricultural Research and Extension Network of Overseas Development Institute, UK (March 10-21, 2003).
Neuchatel Group (2002) . Common Framework on Financing Agricultural and Rural Extension, Neuchatel Group, Swiss Centre for Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, Lindau
Pal, S. and Singh. Alka (1997). Agricultural Research and Extension in India: Institutional Structures and Investments, Policy Paper 7, National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research, New Delhi.
Pawar C.S. and Patel, H.G. (2002). AGROCEL-Agro-Service Centres- A Bloom from Desert, In Chandra Shekhara P (ed) Private Extension: Indian Experiences, National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management, Hyderabad.
Ramana, N.V (2003). Role of Market Linkages in Livelihood Promotion in the Rural Economy: Case of select sub-sectors in Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu, Paper presented at the workshop on Best Practices for Sustainable NGO/CBO Agricultural Marketing Initiatives, Bangalore (27-28 March, 2003).
Recke, H. (2003). Contribution to the e-mail discussion on "Prospects and Limitations of Private Extension Delivery" sponsored by Agricultural Research and Extension Network of Overseas Development Institute, UK (March 10-21, 2003).
Reddy, R (2003). Internet kiosks to help cotton farmers. The Hindu Business Line, 24 April, 2003.
Rishi Kumar, V. (2002). Cooptions tech designing ASPs for rural tracks. The Hindu Business Line, 17" October.
77
Roling, N. (1988). Extension Systems- Information Systems in Agricultural Development, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
Roling , N.G. (1990). The Agricultural Research-Technology Transfer Interface: a Knowledge System Perspective. In D.Kaimowitz (ed) Making the Link: Agricultural Research and Technology Transfer in Developing Countries, Westview Press, Boulder.
Roling, N.G. and M.A.E. Wagemakers (1998).Facilitating Sustainable Agriculture-Participatory Learning and Adaptive Management in times of Environmental Uncertainity, Cambridge University Press, UK
Roling, N.G. (1994). Agricultural Knowledge and Information Systems' In D.J Blackburn (ed) Extension Handbook-Process and Practices, Toronto, Thompson Educational(2"'* Ed.ition)
Saravanan, B. (2002). Case studies on Private Extension, In Chandra Shekhara P (ed) Private Extension: Indian Experiences, National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management, Hyderabad.
Saravanan, R. and Shivalinge Gowda, N.S. (2000). Status and functioning of the two private consultancy agencies in Coimbatore District of Tamil Nadu. Paper presented at the National Seminar on Private Extension: Approaches and Challenges in the Millennium, 28-29 July, 2000, MANAGE, Hyderabad.
Schlotmann, L. (1997). Privatisierungvon Beratungsdiensten, Drei Fall s t ud i en zur l andwir t schaf t l i chen Bera tung in Ecuador , Sozilaiwissenschaftliche Schriften zur Landnutztung und landlichen Entwickling 18 Madgraf Verlag, Weicjersheim Quoted from Katz (2002), Innovative Approaches to financing extension for agricultural and natural resource management-Conceptual considerations and analysis of experience. Lindau: Swiss Centre for Agricultural Extension.
Shah, A. C. (2003). Contribution to the e-mail discussion on "Prospects and Limitations of Private Extension Delivery" sponsored by Agricultural Research and Extension Network of Overseas Development Institute, UK (March 10-21. 2003).
Silim, N. (2003). Contribution to the e-mail discussion on "Prospects and Limitations of Private Extension Delivery" sponsored by Agricultural Research and Extension Network of Overseas Development Institute, UK (March 10-21, 2003).
78
Singh, R.E (2003). Monitoring and Evaluation Experience of Agricultural Projects in India- A comparative analysis of DASP and NATP in India, Paper presented at the Government of India-World Bank workshop on Operationalising Extension Reforms in South Asia (6-8 May 2003), New Delhi.
Singh, Sukhpal (2002). Multi-national Corporation and Agricultural Technology Transfer- A case study of contract farming in the Indian Punjab, In Chandra Shekhara P (ed) Private Extension: Indian Experiences, National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management, Hyderabad.
Sood, A.D. (2001). How to wire rural India: Problems and Possibilities of Digital Development, Economic and Political Weekly, 27 October.
Sulaiman V.R. and Gadewar, A.U. (1994). Privatisation of Extension Services-Implicat ions in the Indian Context, Journal of Rural Reconstruction, 27 (2)
Sulaiman, V.R. and V.V. Sadamate (2000). Privatising Agricultural Extension in India, Policy Paper 10, National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research, New Delhi
Sulaiman V.R. and Georgina Holt (2002). Extension, Poverty and Vulnerability in India-Country Study for the Neuchatel Initiative, Working Paper 154, Overseas Development Institute, UK.
Sulaiman,VR. and A.W. van den Ban (2000). Agricultural Extension in India, The Next Step, Policy Brief 9, National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research, New Delhi.
Sulaiman VR. and Andy Hall (2002). Beyond Technology Dissemination-Can Indian Agricultural Extension re-invent itself? Policy Brief 16, National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research, New Delhi.
Sulaiman, VR. and Andy Hall (2003). India: The emergence of Extension-Plus: Future for Extension beyond technology Transfer? In Rivera, W.M and Gary Alex (eds) Extension and Rural Development, The World Bank, Washington, D.C. (forthcoming)
Sulaiman, V.R. (2003). Innovations in Agricultural Extension in India, SD Dimensions-Knowledge, June 2003, FAO.
Swanson, B.E and Clarr, J.B. (1984). Agricultural Extension-A reference manual, 2"^ Edition, FAO,Rome.
79
Tomar, VS.(2003). Proceedings of the DFID NRSP-GVT Policy Review Workshop of the Research Project R8100 Investigating Improved Policy on Aquaculture Service Provision to Poor People, Noida, Delhi (http://www.streaminitiative.org/Library/pdf/pdf-india/PolicyReview.pdf)
Umali, D.L. and Schwartz, L. (1994) Public and Private Agricultural Extension: Beyond Traditional Frontiers, World Bank Discussion Paper, No 236, World Bank, Washington, DC.
Van Beek, PG.H. (1997). Beyond technology transfer, European Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 4 (3), 183-192.
Van den Ban, A.W and Hawkins, H.S. (1998). Agricultural Extension, CBS Publishers and Distributors, New Delhi.
Van Den Ban, A. W. (1998). Supporting farmers decision making process by Agricultural Extension, Journal of Extension Systems, 14, 55-64.
Van den Ban, A. W. (2000). Different ways of financing agricultural extension, London, Network Paper No 106b, ODI Agricultural Research and Extension Network , Overseas Development Institute, London.
Zeeuw, H. de (2003). Contribution to the e-mail discussion on "Prospects and Limitations of Private Extension Delivery" sponsored by Agricultural Research and Extension Network of Overseas Development Institute, UK (March 10-21, 2003).
80
Annexure I
Policy Framework for Agricultural Extension
The document's main provisions include:
At the policy level
• A move towards a farming systems approach.
• Partnerships with private and other public agencies in extension provision,
including :
public funding of private provision cost-recovery for some services, skill enhancement among farmers linking of technology advice to new market opportunities local-level accountability of extension workers to farmers.
Institutional restructuring
• Some reduction in the number of village-level extension workers, and instead a focus on small Block towns (a Block being an administrative unit of some 70 villages) where single-window extension services will be provided, using the Agricultural Technology Management Agency (ATMA) model.
• Using participatory Strategic Research and Extension Plans (SREPs) to drive local-level technology generation.
• Extension delivery at the Block town level complemented by strengthened farmer-interest groups capable of creating 'demand puir on the system.
Financial reforms
• Central Government will contribute towards operat ion and management costs in future, though salary costs will remain the responsibility of the States.
• Additional public funds will go into a number of new areas, including the payment of honoraria for para-extension workers, and support to NGOs involved in local level group formation.
Strengthening research-extension linkages
• Preparation of SREPs, with efforts to reactivate existing interactions, such as bi-annual meetings between State DoAs and the SAUs, and the national pre-season meeting between ICAR and the DAC
81
Capacity building and skills upgrading
Central Government will support training for extensionists once the States have formulated a Human Resource Development policy for extension.
Such training will include social science and information technology (IT) components not previously incorporated into training.
All agencies (public and private) will be networked electronically to State headquarters, the SAUs, and MANAGE.
Malnstreaming women in agriculture
Women's access to extension and training will be enhanced.
Male extension workers will be sensitised to the needs of women farmers.
Civil service rules will be examined for gender bias.
Access by female extensionists to training will be improved
Use of media and information technology
Provision of on-line market information
Support to the private sector to establish IT information kiosks.
Wider use of mass-media for extension
More farmer participation in mass-media programmes
Financial sustainability
Provisions to privatise the 'private goods' elements of extension, especially in more-favoured areas.
Provisions for cost recovery.
Co-financing of extension via farmers' organisations.
Liberalisation of the regulations governing commercial activities by training centres, etc., to allow profits to be retained
Changing role of government
• The role of government is seen largely in the neo-liberal terms of provision of public goods, and the creation of an enabling environment for efficient functioning of the private sector, with separate provision to make good any market failures not otherwise addressed.
Source: Policy Framework for Agriculture Extension, (2000) Department of Agriculture and Co-operation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India
82