Journal of Extension Systems
Article reprints (US $10/each) may be obtained by contacting the Chief Editor.
1988, Volume 4(2), December
- Woods, J. L. Making Rural Development Projects More Effective: A
Management Systems Approach.
- Rivera, W. M. Developing Agricultural Extension Systems
Nationwide: A Structural Approach.
- Layton, J. J. & F. A. Santopolo. Management of Irrigation
Systems: Organizing Farmers' Participation Efforts.
- Cuyno, R. V. Research System and Research Utilization: How to
Reach the End-Users.
- Wang, G. Indigenous Communication Systems: In Research and
- Verma, O. S. & V. V. Bhaskar. Scientists' Productivity:
AAR-System Versus PA-System: A Case Study.
Woods, J. L. Making Rural Development Projects More
Effective: A Management Systems Approach, 3-28.
This paper focuses on how to make existing rural development projects more effective,
rather then advocating new types of projects. It describes a management systems approach
to project planning and implementation. Through actual experiences gained from 41 UN
sponsored rural development projects in roughly 22 countries, nine specific subsystems are
identified which contribute to the success of rural development projects. The nine
subsystems involved are: (1) Intended Beneficiaries, (2) Field Workers/Change Agents, (3)
Programme Research/Evaluation/Monitoring, (4) Technology Generation/ Adaptation, (5)
Production and Distribution of Supply Inputs, (6) Staff Development/ Training, (7)
Communication Media/Materials, (8) Programme Planning, and (9) Programme Administration
and Supervision. The systems approach stresses the interaction between these subsystems as
contrasted with the common approach of developing individual subsystems. The management
systems approach thus helps project planners and administrators to better understand the
overall job they must do. It also helps explain to people involved in each of these
subsystems how their specific roles fit into the overall project.
Back to Top
Rivera, W. M. Developing Agricultural Extension Systems
Nationwide: A Structural Approach, 29-50.
Agricultural Extension has been narrowly defined, It requires Clarification. There are
at least three definitions: (1) Agricultural Performance, (2) Rural Community Development,
and (3) Comprehensive Nonformal Continuing and Community Education. Similarly, the
assumption that there is one unified extension system is not usually the case. There are
more often "multiple" systems of agricultural extension both in public and
private sectors, In this paper, 12 illustrative types of extension systems, 4 main system
approaches, and 4 corresponding relationships of these approaches to farmers are
presented. in order to develop these systems, five Considerations are important: (1)
Client Profile, (2) Agricultural Production Goals, (3) Extension Institutional
Infrastructure, (4) Environmental Concerns: Natural Resources Management, and (5)
Financial Concerns: National Budget and Donor Assistance. In deciding National options for
extension development, three Frameworks are crucial to policy-makers- (1) Target Group
Selection, (2) Agricultural Production Potential in terms of Yield and Risk factors, and
(3) Multiple Extension Systems and their purposive arrangements. The Clarifications,
Considerations, and Frameworks should help policy-makers in determining the
"Right-Mix" of extension required for their Country's agricultural and
Back to Top
Layton, J. J. & F. A. Santopolo. Management of
Irrigation Systems: Organizing Farmers' Participation Efforts, 51-62.
Many extension efforts on organizing farmers to manage their irrigation systems have
been tried throughout the World. The rationale behind has been that farmers with more
management responsibilities are more willing to invest their time and money. This article
reports work done in Egypt on a Canal irrigation system serving an area of 1200 acres
managed by 1000 farmers. The efforts were made to organise these farmers into a Water
Users Association (WUA) through eight processes of organizational characteristics defined
by Haas and Drabek (1973): (1) Task, (2) Decision Making, (3) Communication, (4)
Coordination, (5) Control, (6) Conflict, (7) Maintenance, and (8) Adaptation. These
processes were guided by a work schedule conceptualised by Sehnert (1960, 1961) as Time
Phases: (1) Introductory, (2) Planning, (3) Organization, (4) Operational, and (5)
Continuation. The principles related to these conceptual schemes help to define the course
of organizational activity, and therefore, the extension effort. The purpose of this
discussion is to describe extension-related process of how one WUA was started in Egypt
for efficient management of an improved irrigation scheme.
Back to Top
Cuyno, R. V. Research System and Research Utilization: How
to Reach the End-Users, 63-74.
Research Utilization is a process of final test when the research results become
integrated into the behavioral pattern of the end-users. It passes through seven steps:
(1) Technology Assessment, (2) Promotion, (3) Attention-Evaluation, (4) Transformation,
(5) Acceptance, (6) Practice, and (7) Internalization. This end-user oriented process is
based on the Technology Diffusion-Adopt ion Process which involves five stages: (I)
Awareness, (2) Knowledge, (3) Understanding, (4) Commitment, and (5) Adoption. The
Technology Diffusion-Adoption Process is governed by several Principles: (1) In the
beginning, an Innovation System, (2) Know the Territory, (3) Have Channel, (4)
Differential Readiness to innovate, (5) Compatibility of Innovation to Existing Situation,
(6) Innovation Barriers Identification, and (7) Role of External Change Agent. Research
Utilization process may be operationalised through a strategy that might include: (1) A
Unit for Communication-Extension, (2) Work Through Intermediaries, (3) Work with
Multipliers, (4) Do not Compete, Collaborate, In this presentation, research utilization
is taken as an integral function of the research system and therefore it is incumbent upon
this system to create mechanisms for ensuring that its research results reach the ultimate
Back to Top
Wang, G. Indigenous Communication Systems: In Research and
The term "indigenous" is often interchangeably used with terms like
"traditional" or "local". True, the Indigenous communication systems
which existed before the arrival of mass media are referred to as "traditional"
or "local" such as puppet show, folk-drama, story-telling, community tea-house,
open market, and village meetings etc. Similarly, there are indigenous knowledge systems
which are based on people's accumulated experiences. Both these systems are conceptually
independent but in reality they are deeply embedded in our socio-cultural system. The
systematic use of both has been well-recognised today in research and development efforts.
They, however, are not without problems and difficulties. In this article, the pros and
cons of the use of indigenous communication systems and indigenous knowledge are
elaborated in the context of research and development.
Back to Top
Verma, O. S. & V. V. Bhaskar. Scientists' Productivity:
AAR-System Versus PA-System: A Case Study, 87-93.
The Productivity Assessment System (PA-System) developed as a result of this study
based on scientists' actual work performance through research, teaching, extension, and
miscellaneous activities is proved to be an objective and reliable instrument especially
when compared with the existing Annual Assessment Reporting System (AAR-System) of Indian
Council of Agricultural Research. The performance of 18 scientists when computed by both
the systems, 15 scientists were found either under-rated or over-rated in AAR-System. The
under-rating was of the order of 24.60 per cent and over-rating 10.20 per cent. This
finding only indicates that there is a substantial amount of subjectivity in AAR-System.
This fact is further corroborated when 9 scientists who were selected by Known Group
Technique supposed to be more productive than those 9 scientists selected at random did
not turn up to be more productive on AAR-System. They all, however, were found to be
symmetrically more productive on PA-System. In view of these findings, therefore, it can
safely be reported that the PA-System is relatively more effective and reliable instrument
to measure the scientists' performance. The AAR-System, by and large, is a subjective
Back to Top