3.1 Education
3.2 Diagnostic Services
3.3 Supply of Production Inputs
3.4 Product Promotion
3.5 Enforcing Regulations
3.6 Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Extension Responsibilities
The primary responsibility of extension personnel world-wide is that of education. Technology transfer is an educational process orchestrated by extension personnel through both formal and informal means.
Formal education by extension personnel takes the form of workshops designed to focus on specific topics, conferences, seminars, and producer meetings. Extension personnel also engage in in-service training of extension agents who are responsible for day-to-day contact with producers. These formal education sessions may focus on a wide array of different topics, from specific management practices to more general technical theories of relationships between stocking and harvest size, and even oxygen fluctuations in ponds and disease diagnosis.
Table 1. Target Groups of Aquaculture Extension Programmes by Region and Country
|
Region/Country |
Private Producers |
Cooperatives |
Subsistence Producers |
Commercial Producers |
Other(*) |
|
AFRICA | |||||
|
Cameroon |
X |
- |
X |
- |
- |
|
Rwanda |
- |
X |
X |
- |
- |
|
Tanzania |
- |
- |
- |
- |
X |
|
Zaïre |
X |
- |
X |
- |
- |
|
Zimbabwe |
- |
X |
X |
- |
- |
|
Subtotal |
2 |
2 |
4 |
- |
1 |
|
ASIA | |||||
|
Jordan |
X |
- |
X |
- |
- |
|
The Philippines |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
Thailand |
X |
- |
X |
- |
- |
|
Subtotal |
3 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
|
LATIN AMERICA | |||||
|
Colombia |
- |
X |
X |
- |
- |
|
Ecuador |
X |
X |
- |
- |
- |
|
Guatemala |
- |
- |
X |
- |
- |
|
Mexico |
X |
X |
X |
- |
- |
|
Panama |
X |
- |
X |
X |
- |
|
Peru |
- |
X |
X |
- |
- |
|
Uruguay |
X |
X |
- |
X |
- |
|
Subtotal |
4 |
5 |
5 |
2 |
- |
|
TOTAL |
9 |
8 |
12 |
3 |
2 |
* Artisanal fishermen
Extension personnel also spend a great deal of time in informal education through farm visits. For example, good extension personnel who get a first-hand view of farm operations can often notice potential problems, and even discuss particular difficulties of an individual's ponds. Farm visits also provide farmers with the opportunity to ask questions on different topics, problems, and issues which are not covered in formal seminars.
Farm-level demonstrations are techniques of informal education in which the extension agent demonstrates a particular technique to improve farm operations for an individual or group of farmers. Hands-on training and education, working side by side with farmers, is an effective albeit time-consuming means to transfer technology.
Educational activities also include dissemination of information to producers and consumers, through, for example, newsletters, newspaper articles, television and radio broadcasts, and utilization of other media. Specific technologies or techniques may also be presented at fairs, markets, and other public gatherings. Printed materials in the form of popular magazines or comics, manuals, bulletins, fact sheets, and books, all contribute to the educational process.
Almost all (87%) of the countries responding to the survey utilized formal education methods (see Table 2).
Only two countries (Colombia and Uruguay) indicated that they did not have organized extension services for aquaculture. All but one country (Uruguay) utilized informal education methods. Uruguay is a country with little aquaculture extension.
Extension services for the agriculture sector invariably establish and provide technical services; for example, seed and soil testing services. These services may be free, charged at cost, or operated for a profit. Most aquaculture extension services provide water quality diagnostic services. Extension agents are often provided with a water-test kit as part of their standard equipment. Basic parameters for water quality can be analyzed to identify its suitability for raising fish, or other aquatic organisms, and to determine the need and quantity of lime and fertilizer. Extension agents with water test kits also have the capability to provide advice on water quality problems related to pond fertility, oxygen, and management.
Many extension services provide disease diagnostic services and recommend treatments to aquaculture producers. This service becomes important in areas where aquaculture has reached industrial levels of production. Most disease and water quality problems originate in extremely fertile ponds as a result of high rates of feeding. In many countries the lack of production inputs for fish farming, such as feed and inorganic fertilizers, results in low pond fertility, and hence production. For most extensive systems, with low levels of production, disease problems are rarely significant and do not justify investment in a laboratory and equipment for disease diagnosis.
Table 2. Responsibilities Assumed by Aquaculture Extension Personnel
|
Region/Country |
Education |
Transport |
Input Supply |
Regulation/ Enforcement |
|
|
Formal |
Informal |
||||
|
AFRICA |
|||||
|
Cameroon |
X |
X |
- |
SEED |
- |
|
Rwanda |
X |
X |
X |
X |
- |
|
Tanzania |
X |
X |
X |
- |
- |
|
Zaïre |
X |
X |
- |
- |
- |
|
Zimbabwe |
X |
X |
SEED |
SEED |
X |
|
Subtotal |
5 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
|
ASIA |
|||||
|
Jordan |
X |
X |
- |
- |
- |
|
Philippines |
X |
X |
- |
- |
- |
|
Thailand |
X |
X |
X |
X |
- |
|
Subtotal |
3 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
- |
|
LATIN AMERICA |
|||||
|
Colombia |
- |
X |
- |
X |
- |
|
Ecuador |
X |
X |
- |
- |
X |
|
Guatemala |
X |
X |
- |
SEED |
- |
|
Mexico |
X |
X |
- |
- |
X |
|
Panama |
X |
X |
X |
- |
- |
|
Peru |
X |
X |
- |
- |
X |
|
Uruguay |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
Subtotal |
5 |
6 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
TOTAL |
13 |
14 |
5 |
6 |
4 |
In rural areas transport and communications are such problems that diagnostic services are not practical. Most disease or water quality problems require a quick response. By the time the agent arrives at the pond, the problem and symptoms may be past. In such situations there is virtually no need for disease or even extensive water quality diagnostic services.
Some countries provide production inputs to new and aspiring aquaculture producers. The decision to supply or not to supply these inputs is most often dictated by overall prevailing political philosophies. For example, in some countries development strategies are based on the concept that the government is responsible for providing all essential inputs. This is often the case where individual producers have extremely limited resources.
Farmers participating in development projects may have difficulty arranging transportation for production inputs. Extension agents often are assigned transportation, and use it to transport materials to farmers on regular visits. For example, feed for livestock (pigs and poultry) which produce manure to fertilize fish ponds may be transported by extension agents.
Only five of the 15 countries responding transported production inputs to fish farmers (see Table 2). The five were Rwanda, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe (in Africa), Thailand (Asia), and Panama (Latin America). In many of these countries transportation itself is often difficult, and fuel shortages are commonplace, particularly for the government sector. These factors drastically restrict the functioning of government programmes.
Six of the 15 countries responding (Cameroon, Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Thailand, Colombia, and Guatemala) indicated that, as a rule, production inputs were supplied to fish farmers. Three of these (Cameroon, Zimbabwe, and Guatemala) specified that the only input was fish seed.
Fingerling production requires a higher level of management than grow-out. New fish farmers lack the required level of management skills to produce their own fingerlings successfully and reliably. Fingerlings may also represent a substantial cost for subsistence or semi-subsistence farmers.
Many nations have developed a policy of supplying fingerlings to producers participating in government projects. The rationale involves a somewhat paternalistic attitude that poor farmers cannot afford to purchase their own seed, and that on-farm seed production is difficult to achieve. Seed distribution is also a quantifiable means of justifying a government station, personnel, and other facilities, and therefore the need for fish seed may be used as a tool by politicians to lobby for hatcheries in their home regions. The pressure to justify the existence of hatcheries may also result in production of "paper" or "book" fish, instead of accurate accounts of fingerlings harvested and distributed.
If government hatcheries consistently supply seed to producers at no charge, the producers may become dependent on the government. Free seed from the government may prevent development of a fingerling production industry and may hinder the growth of a viable aquaculture sector.
Panama has an explicit policy of selling fingerlings at production cost, and encouraging farmers to produce their own seed on farm (Lovshin et al, 1986). Aquaculture development experts believe that the first step towards a viable sector is to transfer seed production technology to farmers who possess adequate resources and conditions (Torrans, 1989).
In Liberia government hatcheries have been transferred to the private sector and are operated by private entrepreneurs (Avault, 1984; Torrans, 1988). While government capital was used originally to construct the seed production infrastructure, government management preferred the greater efficiency afforded by private producers. The same policy has been practised by many developed countries.
Fish culture projects may provide capital to construct fish ponds. In some cases capital is represented by equipment to construct ponds, and may or may not include materials needed for pipework or water supply structures. In Liberia the Nimba County Rural Development Project furnishes the "monk" (the drain unit for the pond) and free fingerlings. The farmer provides the labour for pond construction, and rice bran for feeding (Avault, 1984).
In Panama the Ministry of Agricultural Development (or military units) generally provides bulldozers for earthmoving. Project participants provide labour, housing, and food for the bulldozer operators, diesel fuel for the bulldozer, and all other materials needed to construct the ponds.
The practice of providing production inputs to fish farmers is controversial. It is generally easier for the extension agent to supply seed rather than train farmers to produce their own. On the other hand, government funding for hatcheries may not be reliable, transport needed to deliver the fingerlings may break down, or there may be innumerable other problems, all of which prevent the necessary materials from arriving at the production site when needed, or delivery of fingerlings at the critical time. Farmers who rely on the government to provide these services do not, in general, develop alternative sources of supply or transportation. If government infrastructure breaks down, as it often does, farmers simply do not have the inputs when needed, and production consequently suffers. In practice, dependency on the responsibility of the government to supply production inputs is often cited as a major cause of failure of aquaculture projects (Torrans, 1989).
Some countries with low annual per caput rates of fish consumption may develop extension programmes with activities to encourage consumption of fish. Such programmes, which are common in Latin America, may include distribution of recipes, radio advertisements, demonstrations of preparation methods for fish, and facts on nutritional qualities of fish.
There are several other suitable extension activites used to promote farm products, especially marketing. For example, in Mexico fish markets have been constructed at each fish station to sell production. Nicaragua has mobile vendors to sell fish purchased by the government from fishermen and fish farmers, and eight fish sales modules were constructed in Bolivia in 1988 (Centre de Desarrollo Pesquero, 1989). The government invested in these modules to improve sanitary conditions of fish markets, enhance the appearance of fish and fish products, and to stimulate changes in consumer habits.
In some countries, particularly those in which aquaculture functions are included in a ministry responsible for fisheries, natural resources, and wildlife, aquaculture extension responsibilities may be assigned to agents already charged with regulatory (licensing and enforcement of regulations) and other policing activities.
In four of the responding countries (Zimbabwe, Ecuador, Mexico, and Peru), extension agents have responsibility for regulation and enforcement of laws governing fisheries and natural resources (see Table 2). In the three Latin American countries aquaculture extension is carried out by a fisheries ministry or institute, whereas Zimbabwe has both extension and natural resource regulatory functions in the natural resource ministry. There were, however, several of the other countries in which a fisheries or natural resource ministry was responsible for aquaculture extension, but the extension agents did not have regulatory responsibilities.
The rationale for including regulatory responsibilities with those of technology transfer stems from the limited resources available to many government agencies, and the need to economize. If any government agent is in the field, and particularly working with fish, it is more cost effective to have the agent patrol fisheries waters and look for violators of fishing regulations.
Assigning regulatory responsibilities to an extension agent, however, automatically relegates the agent to a position of antagonist to the farmer. This is unfortunate, as an effective extension agent is one who gains the trust and confidence of producers. An effective extension agent is perceived by client producers as having their best interests at heart. Trust is essential for the transfer of new technology because producers depend on the agent's word and reputation. By placing the extension agent in a position of enforcing regulations (and particularly one wearing a uniform), the agent's ability to gain the confidence and trust of the producers is hampered.
The principal role of extension agents is that of educator. As stated above, whether education is formal or informal the essential purpose of extension is to transfer technology from researchers to producers in whatever manner is most effective. Any other role assumed by an extension agent takes time away from this fundamental activity.
Other roles assumed by an extension agent may result in preventing ancillary business activities from being developed by the private sector. For example, if the extension agents provide a full complement of diagnostic services, at low cost, there would be no market for a private entrepreneur to invest in a water-test kit and begin to develop a business diagnosing water quality problems. If the government, through its extension agents, constructs ponds for producers, provides fingerlings free of charge, or transports feed for livestock, there is no incentive for other individuals to provide these same services. If the government encounters budgetary or political difficulties, the lack of supply of these essential production inputs may endanger the success of the project. On the other hand, unless pond construction is subsidized, the expense of construction may prohibit small-scale farmers from becoming involved in aquaculture.
If an extension agent's defined responsibilities are too broad in scope, it may be impossible for him or her to give good advice in all areas. For example, the background education of most agents is in agriculture or biology, with little or no economics or finance training. But extension agents are often called upon to evaluate credit worthiness of loan applications. The agent may not be adequately prepared to assess credit worthiness properly, and improper recommendations may result.
