Transforming Agriculture Extension

Public Sector Reforms in Agriculture Extension in India

A. Introduction The overall well-being of nearly two-third1 of Indian population is linked to the performance of the agricultural sector as main livelihood provider and its ability to cope with the challenges resulting from rising population pressure, increased pressures on production factors and production uncertainty in changing climate. In the recent survey2, 40% of Indias farmers wanted to leave agriculture if given an alternative. Evidences suggest that investments in extension have the potential to improve agricultural productivity and thus enhance farmers income and impact poverty (Anderson & Feder, 2004). The World Development Reports (2007) emphasis on renewed interest in agriculture extension to revive agriculture and reduce persistent rural poverty is widely recognised. This paper begins with examining status of agriculture extension in declining agriculture share in aggregate terms, followed by Indias public sector reforms to improve agriculture extension in context of training and visits (T&V) model. The subsequent sections deal with the reasons of failure of the model. The paper also highlights shortfalls in policy framework on extension and describes various strategies to meet supply-side improvements and various methods of delivery to make extension demand-driven. The paper concludes that transferring technological innovations from research to fields is a huge challenge and success requires various stakeholders active participation primarily of farmers. B. Agriculture Sector & Extension Although India has been experiencing unprecedented high economic growth rate, but a weak, ineffective and inefficient extension system constrained agricultural-sector growth. The share of agriculture in aggregate income contracted from 31% (1993) to 19% (200305). The 59th round of the Farmers Situation Assessment Survey carried out by the National Sample Survey Organization (NSSO, 2003)3 revealed access and quality related gaps in agricultural extension. More than half of the surveyed farmers had no access to any information source, only 6% accessed a government extension worker and less than 1% accessed either NGO or private sector extension providers. The quality of the information received was perceived as satisfactory, but only 60%
Ag-census of India NSSO survey of 2005 3 Sample size 51770 HH in 6638 villages
1 2

1|Page

actually tried extension recommended technologies. Due to low coverage by extension agents, the technology diffusion relies on information from progressive farmers to other farmers. However, the low percentage (6%) of farmers accessing government extension workers indicates to the problem of widespread absenteeism. It was highlighted in the study that extension services were not demand-driven rather supply-driven. Private sector participation in extension has increased because of growing exports and quality considerations, but the role of public-private partnerships has made little progress. Insufficient recruitment has reduced the number of public sector extension personnel resulting remote areas poorly served. Technology dissemination has apparently remained the major goal of public sector extension but evaluation systems still focus on indicators like number of trainings conducted rather than performance assessments and impact evaluations. B.1 - Agriculture Extension Reform: T&V Model Indian agricultural-sector reforms have focussed on creating a demand-driven and accountable extension system. A range of demand-side measures are employed to enable service users in articulating their needs and holding providers accountable and on the supply-side to effectively and efficiently meet farmers needs. The Training and Visit (T&V) system was promoted by the World Bank and launched in 1977 in India. The main objectives of the T&V system were (PEO, 1982) To disseminate recommended agricultural practices and information about advances made in agricultural technology to the farmers To learn more about the major problems relating to pests and diseases of the local crops, difficulties of the farmers in getting supplies of inputs etc.

The model emphasized the role of the State to facilitate transfer of extension recommendations from research institutions to farmers and receive feedback on usefulness of new methods and practices. The strategy of agricultural development was centrally planned and recommended practices were communicated to the responsible officers at the divisional, district and sub-divisional levels. Village Level Workers (VLW) was the main functionary of the system. VLW was expected to visit 8 to 10 villages under his/her jurisdiction, learn problems of farmers and refer it to agricultural research stations through senior officers. The responsibility to disseminate knowledge rested with 8-10 contact farmers per village selected by VLW. VLWs were to be trained and supervised by the Agricultural Extension officers (AEOs) and Subject Matter Specialist (SMS) at the sub-divisional level. The major findings of The Programme Evaluation Organisation (PEO, 1982), indicates towards potential reasons of failure.

2|Page

The recruitment of SMS was not adequately done thus there was lack of competent staff to extend technical supervision to VLW. A fair number of VLW did not receive any training. The pay scales of SMS were kept too low to motivate them. On top of it, VLW and SMS were assigned a large area to reach out which was too big to serve effectively. Further, reach-out to farmers was affected due to lack of transport support and poor connectivity. Extension process was inadequately monitored as senior officers were irregular visitors to their concerned villages and spent insufficient time even if they visited villages. The coordination committees formed to take stock and steer the extension did not meet regularly and hence problems identified could not be adequately addressed. There was shortfall in expenditure reported year after year because of procedural delays in sanction and release of funds to the State Governments. Lack of supportive policy to decrease cost of inputs, unavailability of inputs and irrigation facilities further affected the adoption of extension knowledge reflecting poorly on the performance of T&V.

The T&V model failed due to implementation problems like delayed sanction of funds, lack of qualified staff, staff deployed for work outside T&V work, improper selection of contact farmers, less attention by contact farmers in educating noncontact farmers, excessive area jurisdiction to workers, insufficient arrangements for conveyance and difficulties in getting recommended farm inputs. The model also had structural (organizational, financial, and institutional) limitations, one-way communication system and a one-size-fits-all research and extension approach based on the agro-climatic conditions of irrigated areas. The T&V system was not well suited to the diverse farming system of rain-fed areas and proved incapable of meeting the challenges of the postGreen Revolution period, including improving the sustainability of farming systems, promoting agricultural diversification and integrating farmers into dynamic markets (Anderson & Birner, 2007). B.2 - National Policy Framework on Extension National Framework on Agricultural Extension envisages facilitating and enabling role for the state in overcoming market failures and emphasizes pluralistic agricultural extension with promotion of demand-driven and farmer-accountable extension (GOI, 2000). It serves as the basis for extension and guides government support to the states in their extension reform efforts. The thrust areas are: Reforming Public Sector Extension Promoting private sector to effectively complement, supplement and wherever possible to substitute public extension Augmenting Media and Information Technology Support for Extension Mainstreaming Gender Concerns in Extension
3|Page

Capacity Building/ Skill up-gradation of farmers and extension functionaries

Although Framework captures many aspects, however, there is inadequate provision for socio-economically disadvantaged groups to participate in FBOs. The Framework proposes to mainstream women by increasing access to services, but, there is insufficient attention to strengthen womens ability to demand extension services. It does not explicitly mention how to meet challenges inherent in reforming public sector extension agencies and creating incentives for the public sector staff to serve remote areas. The Framework includes reforms elements like contracting and competitive grants, but little empirical evidence exists to show the circumstances under which these approaches improve extension services. The omission of the need to tailor context specific solutions is surprising given the size and diversity of India (Anderson & Birner, 2007). C. Strategies to Revive Agricultural Extension State failures in agricultural extension occur because of problems related to information, incentives, capacity, financial sustainability, political will, bureaucratic procedures and attitudes. The Strategies to make public sector extension more responsive to farmers demands include decentralization, increased autonomy of extension agencies, contracting extension services, mass media and internet-based extension through village kiosks, agri-clinics and joint public-private efforts. C.1 - New Institutional Arrangement: Agricultural Technology Management Agency (ATMA) is a district level autonomous body registered as society, representing various stakeholders including farmers in planning, implementation and piloting agricultural extension reforms. It has the flexibility to receive funds directly from Government or raise through membership fees, beneficiaries contribution etc (GOI, 2010). ATMA delivers technology dissemination through multi-agency extension strategy at the district level linking with all the line departments, NGOs, FBOs, Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs), para-extension workers, agri-entrepreneurs, input suppliers and corporate sector. The autonomous status provides discretionary power over operation and budgets thus overcoming limitations of centralised bureaucratic structures. It has provided increased flexibility to extension workers to respond on identified farmers needs rather extending targets driven and centrally planned services. However, the affectivity of it remains to be seen in future. C.2 - Decentralised research and Planning: The extension planning and research has been centrally decided and top-down in the past ignoring importance to integrate local knowledge and need based extension. ATMA is mandated to carry out local research and set extension priorities through Strategic Research and Extension Plans (SREPs) which are developed through consultations with farmers. The SREP as a
4|Page

document reflects detailed farming systems in the district and research extension gaps to be sorted. It feeds in District Agriculture Action Plans (DAAPs) and further at state level into the State Extension Work Plan (SEWP). Though decentralization has inherent merit of bottom-up planning and monitoring at local level but if funding responsibilities are transferred at local level, extension may suffer sustained supply of resources (Raabe, 2007). C.3 - Large scale and complex nature: Indias large number farmers are geographically scattered practising agriculture in different soils, climatic zones thus having varied extension needs. Dispersed nature also makes it difficult to move from delivery of standardized messages to demand-driven advice. The large set-up of extension organization to manage large pool of extension workers has likelihood to maintain top-down bureaucratic management. Managers find it difficult to supervise and monitor extension agents because of agriculture being geographically disperse. Although there is limited room for articulation of farmers demands but high penetration of mobile and radio technology in rural India provides potential solution to lack of staff for face-to-face extension and poor road transport (Ban & Sulaiman, 2000). Internet based E-Choupals promoted by Indian Tobacco Corporation (ITC) has successfully delivered information on prices and inputs in Rajasthan. C.4 Poor Accountability & Incentives: As agriculture outcome is impacted by several factors other than extension, so, it is measured at output level which is generally related to meetings conducted by extension staff, area under new technology etc. It takes away critical assessment opportunity of extension thus staff cannot be held accountable for quality issues. Same is the case of whole chain of responsibility where the performance of senior officer is judged on indicators other than quality of extension. There are not many incentives for extension agents to deliver quality extension as Indian public extension budgets do not keep pace with inflation and general improvements in standards of living, which hamper possibilities to use a differentiated salary incentives system of promotion. Extension agents often have a lower status than many other public sector employees and a lower rank in the civil service system, which affect their morale (Raabe, 2007). There is lack of motivation to invest in the capacity of extension staff to keep their knowledge updated hence inducing performance based incentive does not necessarily lead problem solving. Merit-based recruitment and promotion has potential solution for problem of weak incentives. The performance contracts, managing for results approaches, seeking feedback through client satisfaction surveys, establishing professional standards and mission-oriented service are other strategies. A mechanism widely used in agricultural research, but less so in agricultural extension, is the competitive grant. An important strategy to improve both financial sustainability and demand orientation is cost recovery. Paying a fee may increases farmers incentive to hold extension providers
5|Page

accountable, but it is not necessarily a mechanism that makes extension providers accountable to farmers. C.5 Political link-ups: Due to higher political influence, large-scale farmers often receive more attention from the public administration than smallholders as politicians too have latent motives to serve large-scale farmers by addressing issues that are more relevant to them. Thus, in spite of being majority, small and marginal farmers remain unattended. It is likely that extension workers may be employed outside their job specifications for political purposes such as campaigning for the ruling parties in elections or supply of subsidized inputs and implementing credit schemes. At one hand it takes away time and energy of extension workers and at another provides opportunity for corruption. Increased autonomy for extension agencies can be an important approach to reducing political interest capture and limiting opportunities to burden extension agents with tasks outside their mandate. C.6 - Capacity of Extension Agents to Deliver Extension: The participatory methods to co-develop technology and the Farmers Field School approach create more space to tailor extension as per the demands of farmers (Raabe, 2007). The technical competence alone is not enough rather extension agents need diverse skills of need assessment, group formation, conflict resolution, mobilisation, data collection, analysis and documentation for effective extension. Insensitive extension staff discourages participation by treating farmers badly particularly poor, female, socially excluded farmers. In order to meet capacity needs of extension staff, training courses should attend technical as well as social skills deficit. C.7 - Funding and Private Sector: Allocation of operating expenses in State Departments of Agriculture is around 15% whereas a fully functional extension system should have 30-35% of its total expenses as operational. As cost recovery is not pursued, so. Model remains financially non-sustainability. After donor-funded programs end, extension agencies are often left with an increased number of agents. Because staff numbers are difficult to reduce in public sector agencies, budget reductions limit the resources available to extension agents to do their jobs effectively. Moreover, agents lack adequate operational funds to commute and organize trainings. In case of private sector extension, agents are either paid by the farmers or companies provide extension services with the sale of their inputs and purchase of outputs. However, this kind of service may not necessarily cover all knowledge demands of farmers as being limited to the products purchased and sold. Farmers not demanding extension can be attributed to lack of good extension examples, unawareness about benefits of extension, free of charge government extension which crowd out private extension providers. ATMAs mandate of raising 10% contribution from beneficiaries is a positive incentive for private players to pitch-in. Contracting through competitive bids is an encouraging step by government in extension provision which is perceived as huge market looking at the size of population involved in agriculture. However, it involves considerable challenges, as it
6|Page

brings with the problems inherent in procurement, regulation of private sector and corruption. Being often unorganized and dispersed with limited access to transportation infrastructure, the transaction costs of providing extension services is high and discourages private sector from investing in extension (Anderson & Picciotto, 1997). For private sector, extension is subject to economies of scale as providing extension may only be profitable if they can reach a sufficiently large number of farmers. ATMAs focus on organising farmers in cooperatives, producer companies and other groups which can better participate in extension receiving than individual farmers, lessen the cost and provide organisation power to farmers to demand and monitor extension. Strategies to strengthen FBOs have potential in making extension demand-driven and accountable. D. - Conclusion The renewed interest in extension is linked to the rediscovery of potential that agriculture has in reducing persistent rural poverty (World Bank, 2007). Agriculture extension faces the challenge of establishing a well-managed, effective, and accountable system that meets the needs of millions of farmers engaged in diverse and complex farming systems. After phasing out T&V, Indian public sector concentrated on strengthening supply and demand side aspects of extension services to meet diverse demands of more than 600 million farmers. Supply-side reforms include the administrative and fiscal decentralization, improved public expenditure management, training programs for public officials, creating autonomous bodies with outsourcing of service provision to private and third sectors. Demand-side reforms involve the use of participatory extension approaches, organising farmers in groups and capacity training of farmers to express their demands. Recent reform trends emphasize the need for the state to play a coordinating and facilitating role and to create an enabling environment for the private and third sectors. Policy Framework on Extension should reflect on how to make extension inclusive and challenges in reforming public services. ATMA, an autonomous extension body, is created to plan and implement extension differently. However, it remains to be seen how successfully it meets vast extension needs in future. Extension impacts knowledge level which plays a crucial role in success of a farmer as real prices of agricultural products are falling and knowledge makes it possible to produce more with fewer inputs. It is likely that private sector would get involved extension but the public sector will continue to be the major extension provider and funder. The overall goal of improving farmers lives through agricultural improvement requires coordinated effort from all stakeholders and internal reforms the public system undergoes to deliver effective and efficient extension.

7|Page

References: Anderson, R. J. and Birner, R. (2007) How To Make Agriculture Extension Demand-Driven? The Case of Indias Extension Policy, International Food Policy

Research Institute Working Paper No 00729

Anderson, R.J. and Feder, G. (2004) Good Intensions and Hard Realities The World Bank Researcher Observer ,Vol. 19, No.1: Pp 41-60 Anderson, R.J. and Feder, G. (2003) Rural Extension Services, (Policy Research

Working Paper - 2976) Agriculture and Rural Development Department of The World Bank
Anderson, R.J. and Picciotto, R. (1997) Reconsidering Agricultural Extension, The World Bank Researcher Observer, Vol. 12, No.2: Pp 249-259 Ban, A.W. van den and Sulaiman, V.R. (2000) Agriculture Extension In India The Next Step, Indian Council of Agriculture Research Policy Brief No. 9 Chapman, R. and Tripp, R. (2003) Changing Incentives For Agricultural Extension A Review of Privatised Extension In Practice, AgRen, Agricultural Research and Extension Network, ODI, Network Paper No. 132 Government of India (2010) Support to State Extension Programmes for Extension Reforms, Available At http://vistar.nic.in/projects/xthplanschememain.asp, Accessed on: 17th March 2010 Government of India (2010) Agricultural Census. http://agcensus.nic.in/ACI1.html, Accessed on: 17th March 2010 Available At

Raabe, K. (2007) Reforming the Agriculture Extension System in India: What Do We Know About Works Where and Why? International Food Policy Research

Institute Working Paper No 00775

The Programme Evaluation Organization (1982) A Quick Evaluation Study of Training and Visit System, Available at http://planningcommission.nic.in/reports/peoreport/cmpdmpeo/volume2/aque.pd f, Last Accessed on: 17th March 2010 World Bank Report (2007) Agriculture for Development, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Washington DC
8|Page