Impact of Decentralization on Agricultural Extension System: a case study of Sindh province of Pakistan
Aslam Memon, A. M. Khushk, & M.U. Mallah
Abstract
A study was conducted to asses the impact of decentralization in agricultural extension system in Sindh province of Pakistan. Two districts i.e. Badin and Hyderabad were selected to overview the existing agricultural extension services, financial resources and outcomes of extension worker after decentralization. Study findings show that majority (82%) extension workers had improved their activities; whereas, (72%) farmers claimed that there is no improvement in extension activities after decentralization. It was also investigated that Field Assistants do not receive Traveling Allowances/Daily Allowances (TA/DA) facilities but there is such facility for Agriculture Officers. Executive District Officer Agriculture (EDO) and District Officers (DOs) of respective districts reported that budget has been decreased up to 25 to 30 percent after decentralization. The research-extension-education linkages, which were already weak and insufficient, were further exacerbated. Coordination among all the line departments is sought through placing line departments under the supervision of one person EDO Agriculture at every district. Such coordination would improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the extension effort by avoiding duplication, wastage of time, energy and other resources. The existing system that prevent growers from receiving the correct and timely information, which led to decline in food crop production. There is need to bridge the gap between available knowledge about technologies and actual practice and information delivery service which is the missing link between the research-extension system. The main constraints in agricultural extension services are; inadequate qualified extension staff, lack of coordination, weak linkage among research and extension, farmers and their organizations, limited budget and lack of farmers participation in extension activities.
Key Words: Impact, Decentralization, Agriculture Extension, Pakistan
Introduction
Decentralization of government and administration has been adopted in many developed countries and this trend continues in developing countries. The rationale for the move is that decentralized administration shifts decision-making authority to lower administrative and political levels. These lower level units, being physically close to people, should be able to plan and implement programmes with active involvement of people. The concept is sound, but its implementation in developing countries has, so far, not been smooth for various reasons. For example, central governments have been reluctant in relinquishing their control over decision-making especially in finance; the decentralized units have been showing very weak capacity in running government affairs; and local politician have played havoc in exercising their authority, in an impartial and guided way.
The Agriculture Extension structure in Pakistan is perhaps the oldest organization within the Agriculture Department and is a continuation of the traditional system. It does not suit the present day requirements of a more progressive and integrated approach to agriculture. It is neither operationally attuned to the identification of farmers’ problems nor to a prompt response to their needs. The weaknesses, both in its structure as well as its methodology for transfer of technology to the farmers’, must be addressed on priority if the entire system of extension is to be strengthened and revitalized (Khan, 1998). The slowest progress has been in reforming the technology system, despite the fact that technical change has to play an ever larger role in future growth of agriculture, and is critical to sector competitiveness with liberalized markets. Research, extension, and education need both major institutional reforms and increased funding (Haque, 2002).
In addition, there are some specific problems related to agricultural extension and education. For example, in agricultural extension, there is a very weak mechanism for micro planning at village, Union Council, Markaz and Tehsil levels to mobilize farmers into different interest groups/organizations for enhancing productivity per hectare and marketing their produce. Similarly, Pakistan is faced with the problem of ideally conceived theoretical models, which do not fit into the local situations with special reference to farmers’ organizations, extension infrastructure and available human and financial resources.
An efficient functioning of any organization calls for necessary reforms and improvements in line with the changes in the working environment within which an organization operates. Without such reforms, the organization will either collapse or will keep working inefficiently and eventually become obsolete. Four years ago Government of Pakistan has taken bold decision to decentralize the powers at district level. In other words, district has become the focal point for agricultural activities to be planned and carried out with support of specialists in agricultural research and education.
Before devolution, each provincial department of agriculture had a Directorate-General of Agricultural Extension, administering a large extension network down to the union council level. A union council is a lowest tier of the local government system. Agricultural extension like several other bureaucratic agencies operates on a top-down approach maintaining tenuous linkages with agricultural research, education, and other farm-support system. In this system one Agriculture Officer (AO) guides, trains, and supervise about six to eight FAs. Six to eight AOs are in turn, guided and supervised by an Assistant Director (AD), who is in charge of Agriculture Extension at Sub-division level. Ads are supervised by a Deputy Director, Agriculture, who is in charge of extension work in the district. The Director of Agriculture is responsible for providing leadership at the division level. The overall head of the organization is the Director General. Agricultural extension like several other bureaucratic agencies operates on a top-down approach maintaining tenuous linkages with agricultural research, education, and other farm-support system. However, its level and intensity of operation varies from province to province (Malik, 2003).
Technically, decentralization is the shifting of powers from upper to lower tiers of government and it is more crucial in the process to weigh up and decide what is important and how the various issues are to be treated (Deller, 1998). Decentralization within extension services, and devolution within public administration of powers over the allocation of public funds to support local agricultural (and other) development, are important moves towards the evolution of client-driven processes (Garforth, 1997).
Reforms in the agricultural extension system are generally country specific. However three main ingredients are important for well-structured decentralized governments. First, clarity in assigning the responsibilities with hard budget constraints on nominal central government participation in local functions. Second, revenues must match with the functional responsibilities. Third, a system of accountability balancing central regulations against the local political participation. In short, system based on rules works better than system based on negotiations (Dillinger, 1995). In Pakistan, strengthening the functions of and empowering with more authority to the elected people representatives, the current government announced its devolution plan on August 14, 2001. According to the plan, functions of all service delivery line departments including agricultural extension were transferred from provinces to the newly elected district governments. The introduction of devolution plan is one of the efforts that government has made to introduce drastic changes and to provide bloodline to the existing setup. The plan helps in reducing the bureaucratic impediments and providing people better access to the resources in all the public service departments (Malik, 2003). It underscores the crucial importance of institutional reform, particularly in the domain of public systems, for sustained technical progress and output growth in agriculture. An outline of agrarian organization reveals the disadvantages of small units and the lack of evidence of significant scale economies in agriculture. Whilst there is no need for detailed government control where a commodity or service can be defined unambiguously and all have access (e.g. machinery or fertilizer), it is argued that privatization is not the solution in the case of public goods e.g. the scope for privatization is strictly limited in irrigation research, extension and other infrastructure facilities. Although such services will continue to be mainly the responsibility of the public sector, unless the public sector's efficiency in mobilizing resources and managing these facilities is vastly improved, trade and price policy reform will not make a significant difference to the pace of agricultural growth. It calls for decentralization not only from the center to the states, but also from the state to the local (district) level (Vaidyanathan, 1996).
In the new setup each district of Pakistan is managing its agricultural extension activities where the functions of all sister organizations such as water management, fisheries, livestock, soil conservation, forestry, etc; are put under one manager called as Executive District Officer of Agriculture (EDOA). The designation of Deputy Director Agriculture (DDA) has also been changed as District Officer Agriculture (DOA) who now works under the Executive District Officer Agriculture (EDOA). The EDOA reports to the District Coordination Officer (DCO) who is answerable to the elected District Nazim (administrator) whereas the line departments provide the technical backstopping and monitor the cross-district agricultural development projects. The provincial agriculture extension set-up in the form of Directorate General of Agriculture Extension continues to work and coordinate with the District Extension Services and provides technical support. DG Agriculture Extension retains the subjects of Agricultural Training and Information, Adaptive Research, In-Service Training, Plant Protection and Quality Control, Agricultural Planning and Statistics, and Coordination.
It is revealed that often extension services have been structured and operated on the assumption that farmers’ are largely passive, illiterate and therefore ignorant, and unable to innovate or to integrate new cropping and livestock practices into their established agricultural systems. Key issues that must be addressed are presented: farmers’ priorities in terms of advice and assistance to help them improve productivity on a sustainable basis; the best forms for providing advice and assistance; identifying those responsible for the maintenance of extension services; and how extension services should be funded (Anonymous, 1997). The progressive farmers’ at village level play a very important role in transferring new technologies to the neighboring farmers’ through demonstration and training (Rajbanshi, 1995). There was a general demand for improved information services. Farms of all sizes and types complained particularly of lack of rapid information on supply, demand and market prices of agricultural products (Svatosova et al, 1996).
The most important problems and constraints involved in organizing and managing extension services are: uncertain extension policies on which to build specific extension strategies, weak linkages between technology sources and users, lack of training and incentives for those involved in extension activities, limited financial and material resources, little focus given to women in extension programmes and poor managerial ability in transferring, adapting, managing, monitoring and evaluating imported technologies to improve the structure and effectiveness of extension services in the region. The most important of these is the need for a clear vision in extension policies allowing the formation of development strategies, institutionalization of linkages between the extension service and concerned bodies, farmer participation in planning and the strengthening of extension programmes which target women (Ahmed, 1994).
There is a need to thoroughly review and assess the impact of decentralization of agricultural extension services. Is it successful? Did it really achieve the purpose of making extension services more accessible to farmers? Did the local governments respond favorably as the lead in planning and implementing agricultural programs? What are the benefits that the farmers gain from the decentralization? These and other questions need to be answered in order to evaluate achievements of the purpose of decentralization. This study has been conducted to look at the impact of decentralization on agricultural extension, and identify possible areas of improvement for an effective and efficient devolved agricultural extension.
METHODOLOGY
The aim of this study was to conduct detailed investigation to assess the impact of decentralization in the agricultural extension system in Sindh. For this propose two districts i.e Badin and Hyderabad were randomly selected. The target population for this study consisted of district Nazim, District Coordination Officer, Extension Agents and progressive growers. The sample was selected from a list of farmers provided by the Department of Agriculture Extension using sampling techniques. The Agriculture Officers, Deputy District Officers and District Officers and Executive District Officer Agriculture were also interviewed from district Hyderabad and Badin. A questionnaire was developed through review of literature and guidance from the subject specialist in the area. The first part of the questionnaire included questions regarding selected demographic and socio-economic characteristics. The second part of the questionnaire consisted of impact of decentralization in the agriculture extension system.
Results and Discussion
Facilities
Impact assessment, simply defined, is the process of identifying the future consequences of a current or proposed action. Impact assessment is about making the best possible decision using the best available information in a systematic and proper manner. It is essential to a sound and sustainable business operation. It is also an essential part of good governance and a key to sustainable development. Efforts have been made during survey to assess the impact of decentralization on the department of Agriculture Extension, its facilities, financial resources and activities of extension workers after decentralization. As it is well known that, timely and availability of transport facility with extension worker may enhance working efficiency. It was found that majority (86 percent) of the agricultural extension staff reported that there is no change in transport facility, but in some places this facility has been decreased after decentralization. Also the housing facility for extension staff has been examined and it was found that this facility was not improved after decentralization but to some extent this facility has been decreased after decentralization. In addition to that medical facility of extension staff has been examined and found that Extension staff members did not have this facility before decentralization and same trend remain continue after decentralization.
The TA/DA facility of extension staff has been reviewed and it was found that this facility for extension staff did not improved after decentralization. The key informants reported that Field Assistants does not acquire any TA/DA but very little amount received by Agriculture Officers. Overall 48 percent respondents reported that this facility has been decreased.
Finance
From the extension staff it was asked that how decentralization affect the financial matters of agricultural extension system. All of the Agriculture Officers and Deputy District Officers reported that they are not involved in financial transaction and only EDO and District Officers deal financial matters. Deputy District Officers reported that they have not received any type of money for operational expenditure for the office. EDO and District Officers reported that budget has been decreased up to 25 percent to 30 percent in budget of Agriculture Extension after decentralization. They reported that before decentralization they received quarterly budget and after decentralization they are receiving budget on monthly basis which create problems in utilizing in different heads and also makes difficult to manage demonstration plots. In response to an opinion question, all DDOs are interested be involved in financial matters. They like to have authority to utilize budget at taluka level.
Activities
Wall Chalking
Wall chalking is one of the important activities of extension for transfer of new knowledge to farmers. It was investigated during discussion with farmers and extension agents about the improvements in wall chalking activities after decentralization. The extension agents 16%, 2%, 18%, 40% and 24% reported that no change, very little improvement, little improvement, much improvement and too much improvement respectively. Whereas, in case of farmers 46%, 16%, 16% and 22% pointed out that no change, very little improvement, little improvement and much improvement respectively (table 1).
Printed Material
Distribution of printed material among farmers is an important activity of extension department for transfer of new scientific information among farmers. The extension agents 16%, 8%, 22%, 40% and 14% reported that no change, very little improvement, little improvement, much improvement and too much improvement respectively in distribution of printed material after decentralization. Whereas, in case of farmers 62%, 14%, 12% and 12% reported that there is no change, very little improvement, little improvement and much improvement respectively in distribution of printing material (table 1).
Demonstration Plots
Demonstration plots are more effective source to motivate farmers to adopt new technologies on their farms so it was important to see how much improvement comes in this activity after decentralization. The extension agents 16%, 12%, 20%, 38% and 14% reported that no change, very little increase, little increase, much increase and too much increase respectively in demonstration plots. Whereas, in case of farmers 62%, 14%, 22% and 2% reported that no change, very little increase, little increase and much increase in demonstration plots respectively (table 1).
Printing of Agricultural Technologies
Printing of agricultural technologies in the shape of books booklets, magazines, newspapers and brochures etc are most important lies in the fact that the information may be kept and preserved as documentation for a long time and modern technology transferred from researchers to the farmers who are the end users. The impact on printing of Agricultural technologies was investigated from extension agents and results indicate that 20%, 8%, 28%, 36% and 8% reported that no change, very little increase, little increase, much increase and too much increase in printing of agricultural technologies respectively (table 1).
Seminars
Seminars are also very important activity in transferring technology among stakeholders. The improvement in frequency of seminars organized by agriculture extension was investigated from extension staff and farmers. The extension agents 26%, 14%, 12%, 42% and 6% perceived that no change, very little improvement, little improvement, much improve and too much improvement respectively in organizing of seminars after decentralization. Whereas, majority (62 percent) of farmers reported no change in organizing seminars by agricultural extension followed by 16%, 20% and 2% respondents reported very little improvement, little improvement and much improvement respectively (table 1).
Radio Programmes
Radio is an immensely powerful technology for the delivery of education and quick information with enormous global potential reach. Radio can motivate people by building on aural/oral traditions and stimulate the imagination better than video or television. These receivers are widely available, comparatively cheap and portable, making them convenient for listeners. Keeping in view the importance of radio as source of information, the use of radio for extension messages after decentralization was investigated from extension agents and farmers. The extension agents 18%, 24%, 36%, and 22% perceived that no change, very little improvement, little improvement and much improvement respectively in extension messages on radio after decentralization. Whereas, majority (62 percent) of farmers reported no change in extension messages on radio after decentralization followed by 26%, and 12% respondents reported very little improvement, and little improvement respectively (table 1).
Advice to Farmers
The timely advice to farmers provided by agriculture extension was investigated from extension staff and farmers. The extension agents 26%, 16%, 32%, and 26% reported that no change, very little improvement, little improvement, much improvement and too much improvement respectively in timely advice after decentralization. Whereas, majority (78 percent) of farmers reported no change in timely advice provided by agriculture extension after decentralization followed by 8%, and 14% respondents reported very little improvement, and little improvement respectively (table 1).
Farm Visits
Farm visit is the duty of extension agents, through this activity extension agents receive feedback from farmers and give them advices on the spot. The farm visits of extension staff were investigated from extension staff and farmers. The extension agents 36%, 10%, 32%, 20% and 2% reported that no change, very little increase, little increase, much increase and too much increase respectively in frequency of farm visits of extension staffs after decentralization. Whereas, 82 percent farmers reported no change in farm visits of extension staff after decentralization of agriculture extension remaining 16%, and 2% respondents reported very little improvement, and little improvement in farm visits of extension staff (table 1).
Farmers Training
Farmers’ training is an important activity of extension department to train farmers to use new technology. The increase in farmers trainings organized by agriculture extension after decentralization was investigated from extension staff and farmers. The extension agents 48%, 24%, 16%, and 12% reported that no change, very little increase, little increase, and much increase respectively in farmers training organized after decentralization. Whereas, 88 percent of farmers reported no change in farmers training after decentralization of agriculture extension followed by 8%, 2% and 2% respondents reported very little improvement, little improvement and much improvement in farmers training programs after decentralization (table 1).
TV Programmes
TV is a most powerful media of information exchange in these days. Keeping in view the importance of TV as a major source of dissemination of information among farmers, the use of TV for extension messages after decentralization was investigate from extension agents and farmers. Majority 56% of extension agents reported that there is no change in extension messages on TV followed by 22%, 12%, and 10% perceived that very little improvement, little improvement and much improvement respectively in frequency of extension messages on TV after decentralization. Whereas, 86 percent of farmers reported no change in extension messages on TV after decentralization and remaining 14% farmers reported very little improvement (table 1).
Exhibitions
The exhibitions arrangement after decentralization was investigated from extension staff and farmers. Majority 60% of extension agents reported that no change in agricultural exhibitions organized followed by 18%, 12%, and 10% perceived that very little improvement, little improvement and much improvement respectively in agricultural exhibitions organized by agricultural extension after decentralization. Whereas, all of the farmers reported that there is no change in agricultural exhibitions organized after decentralization of agriculture extension (table 1).
Market Information
Improvement in flow of market information to farmers was investigated from extension staff and farmers. Majority 80% of extension agents reported that there is no change in flow of market information followed by 10%, 8%, and 2% perceived that very little improvement, little improvement and much improvement respectively. Whereas, all sampled farmers reported there is no change in market information after decentralization of agriculture extension. In addition to that role of market agent after decentralization was examined from extension agents and farmers. All sampled extension agents and farmers reported no change in the role of market agent after decentralization (table 1).
Conclusion
Based on the initial investigation it can be concluded that extension agents known as agricultural educator's primary concern is to teach vocational and technical agriculture in all levels and undertake planning and evaluation in agricultural/rural development. They were responsible for the dissemination of appropriate technology in agriculture. While working condition in the existing system of extension personnel have been deteriorated, as it was expected that their role are increasing. They are no longer to be simply transmitters of technical knowledge.
The devolved agricultural extension services are anticipated to result an improved monitoring and evaluation setup in the country as the accountability of extension services is given to the elected local and district government representatives. The problems and issues of agriculture are now being addressed at the local level. Unlike past when everything was centralized with the provincial government, the task of planning and launching any specific campaign in case of outbreak of any disease rests with the district government. Moreover, an attempt has also been made to replace the existing supply oriented delivery system with the demand oriented system ensuring active participation of local people in the process of planning, monitoring and evaluation and bringing it down to the grassroots level.
There is a need of an effective coordination among all the line departments is sought through placing them under the supervision of one person EDOA at every district. Such coordination would improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the extension effort by avoiding duplication, wastage of time, energy and other resources.
On the other hand, it is widely perceived that the elected representatives of the district government are more inclined towards civil works, electricity and other development projects rather than promoting agricultural activities. Thus, their lack of interest and commitment towards agriculture affects the overall performance of agricultural extension system. As a result, the decentralization has further marginalized the extension services - - lack of recognition, importance, budget, and training facilities. It has also weakened the morale and motivation of the agriculture officers and staff. While under the decentralization, the agriculture extension service is placed under the district government and the other sister organizations such as agricultural research, adaptive research, agricultural engineering, agricultural education, etc; are under the control of provincial government. Therefore, the research-extension-education linkages, which were already weak and insufficient, were further exacerbated. The district extension service operates in isolation and without any regular backstopping from agricultural research. Likewise, its disassociation from the Directorate General of Extension has diminished the technical support it used to receive from the provincial system. Abrupt merger of livestock, dairy, fisheries, poultry, forestry, food, cooperatives, water management, and similar other departments with agricultural extension have created ample confusion. By virtue of seniority in service, at several places the officers from outside agricultural extension service became the EDOA. Apart from the professional performance, the extension service under the new arrangements is grappling with the creation of new rules, regulations, service structure and administrative and financial discipline. It seems that it will take a long time to achieve the desired objectives of the decentralization of agriculture extension service.
Results indicated that majority of the extension agents had reported improvement in all extension activities after decentralization but in other side a vast majority of farmers reported these is no change in all extension activities after decentralization. Majority 82 percent of the extension agents perceived improvement in overall performance of the agricultural extension. Whereas, majority 72 percent of the farmers reported there is no change in the overall performance of the agriculture extension after decentralization.
References
Anonymous 1997. Extension services: master or servant? Journal-article. Focus on countries within Africa. Spore, No. 68, 1-3; 3 ref.
Ahmed, A.H 1994. Experience with agricultural extension in the ESCWA region. Agriculture-and-Development-in-Western-Asia., No. 16, 24,31-40.United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia; Amman; Jordan
Deller, S.C. 1998. Local Government Structure, Devolution, and Privatization; Review of Agricultural Economics; 20:1, 135-154.
Dillinger, B. 1995. Decentralization, Politics and Public Services; in: A. Estache (ed.), Decentralizing Infrastructure: Advantages and Limitations: Washington, D.C: The World bank Discussion Paper.
Garforth,C. 1997. Supporting sustainable agriculture through extension in Asia. ODI-Natural-Resource-Perspectives. 21(4): Agricultural Extension and Rural Development Department, University of Reading, PO Box 258, Reading, RG6 6AL, UK. Overseas Development Institute; London; UK
Haque, U. I. 2002. Uplift of Landless Poor thru Agricultural Reforms: WB. The Dawn Group of Newspapers 29 April. http://Dawn.com
Khan, A. M. 1998. Restructuring of the Agriculture Department in NWFP. Unpublished Report presented by The Committee for Restructuring of the Agriculture Department in NWFP to the Chief Minister NWFP, Peshawar. December, 30.
Malik. W. 2003. Operationalizing Agricultural Extension Reforms in South Asia. A case study. Paper presented at Regional Workshop held in New Delhi, India. Organised by Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. In Collaboration with The World Bank.
Rajbanshi,K.G. 1995 . Aquaculture extension services review: Nepal. FAO-Fisheries-Circular. 1995, No. 896, ix + 37 pp. CHA/2/835, Nursery Lane, Banslari,
Svatosova,L., Prasilova,M. 1996 Analysis of the state and needs of the Czech agricultural extension service. Zemedelska-Ekonomika. 42(10),PP 465-471. Ceska zemedelska Univerzita, 165 21 Prague 6-Suchdol, Czech Republic.
Vaidyanathan, A. 1996. Agricultural development: imperatives of institutional reform. Economic-and-Political-Weekly. 1996, 31: 35-36-37, 2451-2458; 18.
Table 1. Impact of Decentralization on Extension Activities
Activities | Extension Agents | Farmers | ||||||||
No Change | Very Little Improvement | Little Improvement | Much Improvement | Too Much Improvement | No Change | Very Little Improvement | Little Improvement | Much Improvement | Too Much Improvement | |
Wall Chalking | 16 | 02 | 18 | 40 | 24 | 46 | 16 | 16 | 22 | - |
Distribution of Printing Material | 16 | 08 | 22 | 40 | 14 | 62 | 14 | 12 | 12 | - |
D. Plots | 16 | 12 | 20 | 38 | 14 | 62 | 14 | 22 | 02 | - |
Printing of Agri. Technologies | 20 | 08 | 28 | 36 | 08 | - | - | - | - | - |
Seminars | 26 | 14 | 12 | 42 | 06 | 62 | 16 | 20 | 02 | - |
Radio Programmes | 18 | 24 | 36 | 22 | - | 62 | 26 | 12 | - | - |
Timely Advice | 26 | 16 | 32 | 26 | - | 78 | 08 | 14 | - | - |
Farm Visits | 36 | 10 | 32 | 20 | 02 | 82 | 16 | 02 | - | - |
Farmers Training | 48 | 24 | 16 | 12 | - | 88 | 08 | 02 | 02 | - |
TV Programmes | 56 | 22 | 12 | 10 | - | 86 | 14 | - | - | - |
Exhibition | 60 | 18 | 12 | 10 | - | 100 | - | - | - | - |
Flow of Market Information | 80 | 10 | 08 | 02 | - | 100 | - | - | - | - |
ANNEXURE – I
ORGANIZATION CHART BEFORE DECENTRALIZATION OF
AGRICULTURE EXTENSION DEPARTMENT
ORGANIZATION CHART AFTER DECENTRALIZATION OF
AGRICULTURE EXTENSION DEPARTMENT
1
No comments:
Post a Comment