Previous - Next
5. Lessons learned: Usefulness of SEC for improving extension system and programmes
5.1. SEC enhances the agricultural extension planning process
5. 2. SEC builds cadres of extension programme planners and trainers
5. 3. SEC helps in improving extension linkage with research
5. 4. SEC is needed most by small, resource poor farmers
5. 5. SEC helps in improving extension linkage with training
5. 6. SEC reduces extension system's workload and increases its coverage
5. 7. SEC encourages partnership with, and participation of, community-based organizations
5. 8. SEC helps revitalize extension workers' professionalism
5. 9. SEC shows that extension programmes can be strategically planned, efficiently managed, and systematically monitored & evaluated
5. 10. SEC can contribute in improving and strengthening agricultural extension systems and programmes
This Chapter will not discuss the lessons learned on how to plan, implement, monitor and evaluate SEC activities. To a large extent, such lessons have been drawn by Adhikarya with Posamentier (1987) from the experiences of the Bangladesh Rat Control Campaigns of 1983 and 1984. Instead, this Chapter will discuss the macro-level implications from the SEC experiences for strengthening and improving public-service agricultural extension systems, programmes and activities. It was pointed out earlier in Section 1.2 that SEC is not a substitute for an agricultural extension system or programme. SEC is only one of the non-formal education methods which should be an integral part of an agricultural extension system and/or programme. Experiences from various SEC applications have generated some important and useful lessons for increasing further the effectiveness and efficiency of agricultural extension system and programmes by applying some or all of the SEC elements and/or principles.
5.1. SEC enhances the agricultural extension planning process
Strategic Extension Campaign (SEC) method places premium importance on a systematic procedure of assessing the felt needs of target beneficiaries (e.g., small farmers, rural women, youth, etc.) as well as the intermediaries (e.g. extension workers, trainers, subject-matter specialists, etc.), and in identifying their perceived problems or issues which might be the reasons for non-adoption or improper practice of a certain recommended technology. SEC experiences have indicated that the important principle of developing specific and precise extension objectives based on felt needs and perceived problems of the target audience (i.e., beneficiaries and concerned persons involved in agricultural extension/outreach activities) is fundamental to ensuring the relevance and appropriateness of a strategically-planned and participatory-approach agricultural extension programme.
SEC activities have also shown that many extension planners/managers and trainers who had been trained in SEC workshops, especially on the Use of Farmers' Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice (KAP) Survey, and on Strategy Planning, Message Design and Multi-Media Materials Development, have applied strategic planning principles. They have commissioned or conducted KAP/baseline surveys, including Focus Group Interviews (FGI) and used the quantitative data and qualitative information as inputs for routine extension programme planning, monitoring and evaluation, thus beyond extension campaign purposes. Extension programmes and activities, as a result of such strategic planning and systems-approach orientations, are thus more focused, needs-based, problem-solving, and have specific objectives and tailored-messages specifically designed for segmented target groups. Previous extension orientation seemed to be more of an ad-hoc and sporadic technology dissemination approach, with general objectives and sometimes vague or irrelevant messages.
Observations have also been made on the "strategic" decision making processes applied by those who have been involved in SEC planning, implementation, and management activities. Such strategic decisions are most clearly demonstrated in undertaking specific tasks, such as, prioritizing extension problems to solve, formulating specific and measurable extension objectives, determining relevant and appropriate extension messages and training contents, selecting the cost-effective combination of multi-media support materials to develop, pretest, and produce, management planning for extension/outreach activities, etc. The conscious, planned, and systematic efforts reflected as a result of such strategic thinking and decisions, can significantly help increase the cost-effectiveness and efficiency of agricultural extension programme performance as reported by many SEC programmes. There is clear evidence that some or all SEC elements are applicable and useful for improving further the performance and quality of regular agricultural extension system and programmes.
5. 2. SEC builds cadres of extension programme planners and trainers
In SEC activities, human resources development through staff training on the SEC methodology (see Figs. 2.2 and 2.3) is a very crucial element. It should be considered as a good "insurance policy" to ensure sustainability and institutionalization of the application or utilization of the SEC know-how in support of agricultural extension programme implementation. Through various practical hands-on, skills-development oriented, and experiential-learning method SEC workshops, a core-group of agricultural extension and training staff in a given country are trained to serve as SEC Master Trainers and Master Planners.
SEC experiences have shown that when there is an adequate number of SEC trained personnel in a given agricultural extension and/or training institution, in the process of SEC replications, they can effectively serve as multiplier agents in developing other SEC trained resource persons (see Section 4.2.4 and Fig. 4-19). Furthermore, some SEC Master Trainers do not only serve as resource persons in their respective countries, but they also proved to be effective in assisting SEC programme replications in other countries as shown in Fig. 3.1.
An important lesson learned from SEC experiences in different countries regarding its training strategy is that it does not create an unnecessary "dependency" on foreign resource persons and/or consultants, after the initial round of training of trainers activities have been completed. It seems possible to transfer SEC methodology through training of local extension planners and trainers, without having to perpetuate the need for external technical assistance after one or two SEC programmes have been implemented successfully.
5. 3. SEC helps in improving extension linkage with research
In any SEC programme, a new or existing agricultural technology package must be identified and selected as the core contents for the development of extension messages. With the assistance of appropriate agricultural research staff or subject matter specialists, the recommended technology package must be validated, and the essential and/or critical elements of the technology must be specified. Without such specific sets of information, the level of knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) of farmers regarding the technology can not be determined through a KAP/baseline survey. SEC experience showed the importance, and useful results, of the collaboration between research personnel and extension staff in planning a KAP survey, and in formulating and prioritizing extension objectives based on the survey data.
SEC activities have also demonstrated that even when no "new" agricultural technology or innovation is available, extension services to most farmers on "existing" technologies and/or know-how are necessary and needed. Through a KAP survey, the specific status of a given technology adoption or practice among farmers, and more importantly, the reasons for non-adoption, and the degree of inappropriate practices, of such a technology, can be determined and analyzed. Such data, information and analysis are important inputs for research staff to improve the technology to make it more acceptable for proper adoption by farmers. Thus, the SEC's participatory process by facilitating a two-way communication between research-extension-farmers helps in setting the research agenda by providing "feed-forward" information regarding research needs as perceived by farmers. Such an agriculture research "agenda-setting" function seems to be performed effectively by SEC activities, especially regarding indigenous knowledge system or existing/known cultural practices, which have been practiced by some but not the majority of farmers.
5. 4. SEC is needed most by small, resource poor farmers
It has been widely reported by many diffusion of innovation studies (Rogers, 1981) that "new technology" or innovation (incl. agricultural technology), as long as it shows tangible benefits, or an improvement over the old practice, such a technology will transfer or spread fairly easily, even without the help of an extension service. However, in such a case, the higher SES (socio-economic-status) group members of the community are those who are more likely to practice or adopt the recommended new technology (Rogers and Adhikarya, 1979). For the lower SES group members, the process of adopting and practicing properly the recommended technology is more than just rational decision-making based on risk analysis, economic benefits or other incentives/rewards considerations. Information accessibility, limited relevant technical know-how, social and cultural biases, resource constraints, etc. are also additional factors that might impede the adoption of recommended agricultural technologies by disadvantaged groups with low SES such as small, resource-poor farmers, etc. (Adhikarya and Rogers, 1978).
As reported during the FAO's Global Consultation on Agricultural Extension, most extension services in both developed and developing countries are assisting large and/or commercial farmers. An FAO-sponsored survey of 207 agricultural extension organizations in 113 countries revealed that in 1988 approximately 58 percent of extension resources worldwide were directed toward commercial farmers, including specialized producers of cash crops and export commodities. Only 22 percent of extension resources were directed toward subsistence or small farmers (Swanson et.al., 1990). One of the consequences of such a situation is the widening of knowledge and benefits gap between large and small farmers. SEC's problem-solving orientation puts heavy emphasis on assisting small, resource-poor farmers and appears to be quite effective in undertaking special intervention programmes to reduce or narrow such a gap.
Furthermore, extension programmes do not always need to rely on agricultural research to provide "new" technology packages. There are usually many existing or "old" agricultural technologies or cultural practices which have not been properly practiced by the majority of farmers, especially by small, resource-poor farmers. Many KAP surveys conducted in developing countries revealed that plenty "old" agricultural technology packages are not known, accepted, and/or properly practiced by a large number of small farmers. For these target beneficiaries, special SEC intervention programmes focusing on "old/existing" technology recommendations or packages are most needed in order to narrow the agricultural knowledge and development benefits gap between large and small farmers (Adhikarya and Rogers, 1978).
5. 5. SEC helps in improving extension linkage with training
For most agricultural technologies to be adopted and practiced properly by farmers, training for them on the applications or utilization of such technologies, especially through practical field-based instruction, hands-on demonstrations, etc., is needed. However, many studies and field experiences have shown that often farmers are not motivated and/or interested in attending or actively participating in training courses organized for them. Many reasons have been given for such poor attendance or participation in farmers training programmes, among others, lack of time, perceived irrelevance of a training course, unaware of the importance of the training topic, etc. However, one of the most important underlying causes for such a problem is the lack of a "felt-need" for participating in a given training programme among these farmers.
SEC results and experience indicated that by informing and motivating target beneficiaries, especially small, resource-poor farmers, on the importance of, and need for, adopting/practicing a given recommended agricultural technology, it also creates either a "perceived" or "felt" need among these farmers for more detailed and comprehensive information and clarifications, and thus training. As a result of an effective SEC programme, farmers' "demand" for training on various aspects of the campaign topics or recommendations can normally be expected. One of the lessons learned from SEC activities is that extension programmes, especially through SEC, can create farmers' awareness, motivation, and felt-need for training, and thus provide a conducive condition for effective and participatory-oriented farmers training. Hence, SEC is a critical precondition or prerequisite for improving the effectiveness and usefulness of farmers training programmes.
5. 6. SEC reduces extension system's workload and increases its coverage
One of the important features of SEC is the strategic and planned use of selected cost-effective multi-media channels and/or materials, through a combination of personal, group and mass communication approach or system. Unlike many other conventional extension approaches or programmes, SEC does not only rely on extension workers to undertake all or most of the extension tasks. At the FAO's Global Expert Consultation on Agricultural Extension in 1989, it was revealed that extension programmes in most countries, despite the limited transport facilities and vast areas to cover, had relied heavily on agricultural extension workers and other agricultural field personnel, with very little mass communication support. The extension agent: farmer coverage ratio in Latin America is 1: 2,940, in Asia 1: 2,661 and in Africa 1: 1,809. It was reported that only 16 percent of the extension programmes, worldwide utilized mass media/mass communication channels (FAO, 1990). Moreover, during the Consultation, it was also reported that an average of 26 percent of the extension workers' time was devoted to non-educational tasks (Swanson et.al., 1990). Thus, one of the weaknesses of many agricultural extension system or programmes, especially in developing countries, is the over-dependency on extension workers to undertake all sorts of agricultural development related tasks, - a significant portion of which are not educational or instructional in nature. As a result of such a problem, most extension workers are overworked, ineffective, and not able to have a wide outreach coverage.
As suggested in Fig. 2-5, for certain tasks that deal with informational and motivational activities, for instance, the involvement of extension workers may not need to be as intensive or active as if the tasks relate to educational, instructional, field-based training, or action-oriented activities. SEC experiences in many countries have demonstrated that by employing a multi-media strategy, extension workers' workload of non-educational matters can be reduced, so they can undertake more important and relevant tasks which can not be done as effectively by mass or mediated communication channels or materials.
The investment and operational cost of employing extension workers cost is one of the highest among agricultural extension expenditures. By properly utilizing such human resources to undertake the tasks they do best, SEC experience indicates that not only extension programme cost-efficiency can improve (i.e., in terms of coverage expansion or reaching more farmers per extension worker), but also its performance quality and cost-effectiveness can be increased (i.e., in terms of increasing the levels of farmers' knowledge, positive attitude, and proper practice).
5. 7. SEC encourages partnership with, and participation of, community-based organizations
In most SEC activities, community-based resources, including other non-agricultural institutions (schools, rural development agencies, mosques, churches, local government units, etc.), non-government organizations (cooperatives, peasants organizations, water-users associations, self-help groups, women's organization, etc.), and private sector (seed dealers, fertilizer suppliers, rural shops, etc.), as well as intermediaries such as teachers, school children, religious and community leaders, etc. have been actively involved to assist agricultural extension workers in campaign planning and implementation. Such a partnership and the "buying-in" by community-based resources into a given SEC programme can enhance and facilitate its sustainability and institutionalization (Maalouf, Contado, and Adhikarya, 1991).
An important lesson learned from the above-mentioned experience is that with participatory planning approaches, and close coordination procedures, within a given agricultural development policy and programme context, community support and resources can be mobilized to support planned extension activities. More importantly, the support and endorsement of influential community leaders and the involvement of community-based institutions provide legitimization and credibility to SEC objectives, activities, and messages. However, such a participation by relevant government and non-government organizations must be coordinated properly by the Ministry of Agriculture (i.e., agricultural extension service or department), and the collaborative activities should be consistent and compatible with existing agricultural development strategies, and in support of planned extension programmes, Training activities on the extension programme implementation details and its technical contents for non-agricultural personnel from the participating community-based organizations are also critical to the success of such a collaborative and participatory extension service.
5. 8. SEC helps revitalize extension workers' professionalism
Involvement in a campaign activity can be considered as an additional burden by many extension workers who are already overworked with routine tasks. SEC experiences, however, suggest that if some types of incentives can be provided to these workers, their support and participation in campaign activities will be forthcoming. These incentives, however, do not need to be in a form of financial rewards. From SEC experiences in many developing countries, it appears to be sufficient to offer enhanced prestige or status symbols rewards in order to mobilize extension workers' support.
By providing extension workers with attractive and useful multi-media campaign materials which they can use with, or give to, their clientele (i.e., farmers), SEC programmes were able to boost the prestige and credibility of these workers among their friends and farmers. Previously, extension workers were perceived by many as having a low credibility. More importantly, SEC activities helped them gained improved self-confidence by providing new or additional know-how on the recommended campaign topics or messages through special training/briefing. In addition, all campaign media, including printed materials, radio and television programmes, etc., publicized the extension workers as being specially trained and thus highly qualified, and suggested that farmers contact them for further information and advice. Such positive image-building publicity conferred on the extension workers a certain status which served to increase their enthusiasm and motivation to be involved in extension campaign activities.
Another lesson learned from the SEC activities is that frequent field visits to sub-districts or villages by relatively high agricultural officials from provincial and/or central levels to discuss and learn the problems and needs of extension workers and farmers are well appreciated. Such an effort can serve as a cost-effective means of boosting the morale and work enthusiasm of agricultural field personnel, and increasing the support and participation of community leaders and their members in agricultural extension an training activities.
The SEC programmes undertaken in many developing countries have demonstrated that even with limited resources and utilizing existing facilities, agricultural extension intervention activities which have a programme focus with specific/measurable objectives can be undertaken successfully. The SEC process, including its conceptual framework and operational procedures/steps has increasingly been considered as a "microcosm" of how a routine agricultural extension system or programme can be planned, managed, monitored, and evaluated. Having been involved in SEC activities, and/or seen the actual achievements and results of such activities, many extension planners, managers and trainers, as well as their superiors and other agricultural decision-makers have taken initiatives of applying important SEC principles and methods for improving the agricultural extension programme.
One of the critical lessons generated from the SEC experience is that evaluation results should also include a process documentation detailing the important decision-making steps and/or procedures from the initial stage until the completion of the programme. Without such insights into the entire process, including the what, why, and how aspects, of the extension planning, training, management, and monitoring & evaluation activities, it would be unlikely that replications of an SEC programme can be done with a high degree of quality control.
After more than a decade of experience with SEC programme implementations in many developing countries as listed in Fig. 4.1, including methodology development & testing, training materials preparation, and training of trainers activities, there are many important concepts, principles, and/or actions based on the SEC methodology which can be useful for improving and strengthening agricultural extension systems and programmes, Without elaborating on the contextual and operational requirements for applying these concepts or principles, as these are not the main focus of this chapter, and thus with a risk of over-simplifying them, some of most important concepts or principles are summarized below:
(r) Problems identification and needs assessment should be undertaken using appropriate participatory approach and scientifically-sound methods, such as, micro-level baseline survey of farmers' Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice (KAP), including focus group interviews (FGI).
(r) Extension objectives should be specific, measurable, problem-solving oriented, reflected in terms of knowledge, attitudes, and/or behavioural changes, and based on target beneficiaries' needs.
(r) Strategic planning principles should be applied, especially in prioritizing problems to be solved by extension and training activities, and in audience analysis and target beneficiaries segmentation.
(r) Resource allocation, including field personnel tasks assignment, should be based on cost-benefits and risk/payoff analyses and guided by specific extension programme objectives, strategy and plan.
(r) Extension programmes must be planned, implemented and managed by a multi-disciplinary team of personnel, and this will require practical and workable functional linkages and collaboration among relevant agencies/staff dealing with agricultural research/technical subject matters, extension, training, communication support, etc. as well as concerned government and non-government organizations.
(r) Participation and active involvement of relevant community-based organizations in support of specific extension activities under the coordination of a national extension service or agency should be sought. Community-based resources should be mobilized and utilized not only for the purpose of sharing the cost and burden of public extension service, but more importantly for facilitating the sustainability and institutionalization of some aspects of such a service.
(r) Extension programmes or services should not only provide agricultural research agencies with feed-back from farmers about recommended technologies generated by research, but it should also provide feed-forward information on research needs of farmers. By providing such an "agenda-setting" service to agricultural researchers, extension workers may, as a result, obtain improved technology packages which are more relevant, appropriate, and useful to farmers' felt needs.
(r) Application and utilization of a multi-media strategy for reaching segmented target audiences should be considered in planning any large-scale extension intervention programmes, Cost-effectiveness of the selected combination of personal, group and mass communication approaches should be carefully examined, based on the extension objectives and/or expected outcome of such a programme.
(r) Formative evaluation, including pretesting of prototype multi-media support materials for use in agricultural extension and/or training programmes, should be conducted with a representative sample of the intended target audience for such materials. Reproduction of these materials should not be attempted before the necessary modifications based on the pretesting results have been completed.
(r) Staff training, on both the technical subject matters/technology packages and specific extension training tasks, should be an integral part of the extension programme preparatory activities. Systematic training needs assessment and tasks analysis for staff training programmes should be conducted regularly to determine which new training subjects are to be offered. In many countries, it is not only training in new technical subjects that is needed. Training on platform and analytical skills also seems to be inadequate, such as on community and group organization, leadership and entrepreneurship development, participatory needs assessment methods, strategic planning and total-quality management principles, message design and multi-media strategy development, cost-benefits and risk/payoff analyses, management information system, new computer and communication technology applications, etc.
(r) Management planning is an essential part of extension programme development, and such a plan should be used not only to guide in the field implementation or operations, but also as a basis for designing and conducting the management monitoring, supervision, and process evaluation activities.
(r) Some extension programmes should be subjected to empirical studies based on quantitative data (e.g., from surveys) and qualitative information (e.g., from focus group interviews), to demonstrate the effectiveness, usefulness, and when possible also the cost-benefits of such programmes, One of the purposes of such an evaluation is to learn the strengths and weaknesses of such extension programmes so that further improvements can be made in future replications. The other, perhaps more important, purpose is to demonstrate the role, function, value, and benefits of well-planned and strategically designed extension programmes to influential agricultural policy and decision-makers, in order to secure more policy support and obtain increased allocation of resources.