{"title":"The influence of privatised agricultural extension on downward accountability to smallholder tea farmers","authors":"R. Mbeche, G. Mose, J. Ateka","doi":"10.1080/1389224X.2021.1932538","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Purpose To assess the extent to which privatised extension service, which is premised to be demand-driven, delivers downward accountability to smallholder farmers who are both owners and users of agricultural services. Design/methodology/approach The research collected data through focus group discussions with smallholder tea farmers and key informant interviews after which the information were corroborated with semi-structured interviews with 104 smallholder farmers. Findings Our findings show that KTDA (Kenya Tea Development Agency) extension service has in recent years embraced methodologies that allow two-way information exchange and farmers’ involvement in planning, implementing and evaluation of extension programmes. While this transition has provided opportunities for increased accountability and empowerment of smallholder farmers, downward accountability is limited by among others; presence of multiple accountabilities, a heavy top-down governance structure, higher incentives for upward accountability, limited resourcing of extension delivery, excessive workload and unrealistic targets on the part of extension staff and weak extension–research–farmer linkages. Practical implications The findings of this study may be used by policymakers, extension practitioners and organisations delivering extension services to improve downward accountability and quality of advisory services Theoretical implications The paper contributes to the debate on outcomes of privatisation on extension provision using the accountability lens in an area dominated by perceptions on costs and payment for the services. Originality/value The literature on downward accountability on privatised extension services is lacking. The paper also extends the framework for assessing the performance of pluralistic extension services to develop and apply a framework for assessing downward accountability in privatised extension.","PeriodicalId":46772,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agricultural Education & Extension","volume":"28 1","pages":"341 - 362"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1389224X.2021.1932538","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agricultural Education & Extension","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2021.1932538","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
ABSTRACT Purpose To assess the extent to which privatised extension service, which is premised to be demand-driven, delivers downward accountability to smallholder farmers who are both owners and users of agricultural services. Design/methodology/approach The research collected data through focus group discussions with smallholder tea farmers and key informant interviews after which the information were corroborated with semi-structured interviews with 104 smallholder farmers. Findings Our findings show that KTDA (Kenya Tea Development Agency) extension service has in recent years embraced methodologies that allow two-way information exchange and farmers’ involvement in planning, implementing and evaluation of extension programmes. While this transition has provided opportunities for increased accountability and empowerment of smallholder farmers, downward accountability is limited by among others; presence of multiple accountabilities, a heavy top-down governance structure, higher incentives for upward accountability, limited resourcing of extension delivery, excessive workload and unrealistic targets on the part of extension staff and weak extension–research–farmer linkages. Practical implications The findings of this study may be used by policymakers, extension practitioners and organisations delivering extension services to improve downward accountability and quality of advisory services Theoretical implications The paper contributes to the debate on outcomes of privatisation on extension provision using the accountability lens in an area dominated by perceptions on costs and payment for the services. Originality/value The literature on downward accountability on privatised extension services is lacking. The paper also extends the framework for assessing the performance of pluralistic extension services to develop and apply a framework for assessing downward accountability in privatised extension.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Agricultural Education & Extension is published to inform experts who do or use research on agricultural education and extension about research conducted in this field worldwide. Information about this research is needed to improve policies, strategies, methods and practices for agricultural education and extension. The Journal of Agricultural Education & Extension accepts authorative and well-referenced scientific articles within the field of agricultural education and extension after a double-blind peer review process. Agricultural education and extension faces profound change, and therefore its core area of attention is moving towards communication, competence development and performance improvement for a wide variety of fields and audiences, most of which can be studied from a multi-disciplinary perspective, including: -Communication for Development- Competence Management and Development- Corporate Social Responsibility and Human Resource Development- Design and Implementation of Competence–based Education- Environmental and Natural Resource Management- Entrepreneurship and Learning- Facilitating Multiple-Stakeholder Processes- Health and Society- Innovation of Agricultural-Technical Education- Innovation Systems and Learning- Integrated Rural Development- Interdisciplinary and Social Learning- Learning, Conflict and Decision Making- Poverty Reduction- Performance Improvement- Sustainable Agricultural Production