an appraisal of extant public agricultural extension

Appraisal of Agricultural Extension System 1

An Appraisal of Extant Public Agricultural

Extension System in Tamil Nadu

A Study conducted for

State Land Use Board, State Planning Commission,

Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai

Centre for Agricultural and Rural Development Studies

Tamil Nadu Agricultural University

Coimbatore 641 003

2007

Draft Final report


An Appraisal of Extant Public Agricultural Extension System in Tamil Nadu

Project Team

N.Raveendaran

K.Mahendran

J.Venkita Prabhu

N.Ajjan

K.A.Ponnusamy

Centre for Agricultural and Rural Development Studies

Tamil Nadu Agricultural University

Coimbatore 641 003

2007


LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Contents Page No.

IRRIGATED ENVIRONMENT

3.1. Age Group of the Sample Farmers 12

3.2. Family Size of the Sample Farmers 12

3.3 Educational Status of the Sample Farmers 12

3.4 Farm Size of the Respondents 13

3.5 Participation of the Sample Farmers in Panchayat Raj

Institutions 13

3.6 Agricultural related Institutional Participation 14

3.7 Exposure to Mass Media 14

3.8 Primary Reason for lower exposure to mass media 15

3.9 Impact of Relationship with Officials of Agriculture

Department 15

3.10 Participation of the Sample Farmers in the Mass Extension

Methods 16

3.11 Primary Reason for Non Participation in Arranged Extension

Activities 17

3.12 Levels of Satisfaction on Information provided 18

3.13 Communication Sources and Levels of Satisfaction 19

3.14 Reasons for Dissatisfaction on the Sources of Communication 20

3.15 Usefulness of the Extension Methods 22

3.16 Quality of inputs 23

3.17 Feed back 23

3.18 Monetary benefits 24

3.19 Social benefits 24

IRRIGATED DRY

3.20 Age Group of the Sample Farmers 25

3.21 Family Size of the Sample Farmers 26



3.24 Participation of the Sample Farmers in Panchayat Raj 27


Institutions

3.25 Agricultural Related Institutional Participation 27



3.28 Participation of the sample farmers in the Mass Extension

Methods 29

3.29 Impact of Relationship with Officials of Agriculture

Department 29

3.30 Participation of the sample farmers in the Mass Extension

Methods 30


Activities 31



3.34 Reasons for Dissatisfaction on Sources of Communication 34



3.37 Feed back 38



DRY ENVIRONMENT

3.40 Age Group of the Sample Farmers 39

3.41 Family Size of the Sample Farmers 40



3.44 Participation of the Sample Farmers in Panchayat Raj

Institutions 41

3.45 Agricultural Related Institutional Participation 41



3.48 Participation level in the Mass Extension Methods 44

3.49 Impact of Relationship with Officials of Agriculture 44


Department


Activities 45



3.53 Reasons for Non Satisfaction on Sources of Communication 47



3.56 Feed back 50



CONTENTS

Sl.No. Content Page No.

1. Introduction 1

2. Methodology 7

3. Results and Discussion 11

4. Suggestions and strategies 57


AN APPRAISAL OF EXTANT PUBLIC AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION

SYSTEM IN TAMIL NADU

Concept

Agricultural extension is a function of providing need based knowledge and skills

to rural men, women and youth practicing agriculture in a non-formal, participatory

manner, with the objective of improving their quality of life. Extension is essentially

education, although it falls outside formal education systems, and as such, aims at

bringing about positive behavioral changes among those targeted. Agricultural extension,

being educational in nature, is understandably a slow process as it aims at changing

human behavior and generally does not show quick and tangible benefits. Public

agricultural extension is a system that is essentially supported and implemented by the

government extending the non-formal education process to the farmers for enhancing

their livelihood with inbuilt sustainability safeguards for use of the available natural

resources in a more judicious way mostly by the way of increasing productivity per unit

of land and water resources.

Context

In recent years, the public extension system has been increasingly criticized for

being not that efficient for all the investment that has gone into creating and sustaining

the organization and staff. They have been targeted for reforms. Certain extension

services have been said to be so large that they are unable to move efficiently because of

their own weight. The fact remains, however, that modernization and reforms are needed

in the existing extension system as a result of the many global forces that are changing

socio-economic and political conditions, creating new challenges and learning needs for

farmers.

Challenges Facing the Public Agricultural Extension System

Shrinking resource bases: The land and water resource base for an average farm holding

has declined considerably during the last five decades (Selvarajan, S and Joshi P.K

(2000)). The main reason for the increasing resource degradation is the inappropriate and

unscientific use of land and irrigation water. Degraded lands are either going out of

cultivation or are being used for growing low value crops. Most of the future agricultural

growth will have to come via yield enhancement, and from rainfed areas, wherein most of

the technologies are knowledge based and need community action.


Changes in demand and consumption pattern: Per capita cereal consumption for food

declined somewhat over the past three decades, while the consumption of fruits,

vegetables, meat, fish, eggs and dairy products increased (Kumar, P. 1998). The demand

for livestock products has been increasing rapidly during the last two decades. Increasing

per capita income and changing lifestyles are expected to further increase the demand for

milk, fruits and vegetables. Rapid growth in livestock demand would push demand for

cereals for livestock feed. Assuming a modest growth in per capita income of two

percent, the total cereal demand in 2020 is projected at 257.3 million tons. For a country

of India's size and population, importing huge quantities of grains is not feasible. The

increased demand has to be primarily met through increase in productivity gained through

increased knowledge application by the farmers.

Changing farming systems: The area under food grains as percentage of Gross Cropped

Area has been declining in the nineties, whereas the percentage share of non-food grains

has been generally increasing during the same period. Area under horticultural crops

increased from 12.3 m.ha in 1991-92 to 15.0 m.ha in 1996-97. Farmers require a different

type of support (training, problem-solving consultancy, marketing advice etc) for growing

many of these crops, than simply information on technology, as was the case earlier.

Declining public investments in agriculture: Public investments in agriculture,

(investments in irrigation, rural roads, rural electrification, storage, marketing,

agricultural research and education, land development, co-operation etc) in real terms

since mid-seventies have been declining consistently in all the states (Ramesh Chand,

1999). Farmers have to join together to put pressure on governments to invest more and

have to pool together their resources to develop and maintain the necessary infrastructure.

Extension may have to support farmers in this endeavor. The increasing pressure on

research funds to find technological solutions to more diverse problems necessitates

serious efforts in research prioritization and targeted technology development. Extension

need to assist and direct researchers in problem focusing and evaluating technological

options.

Fiscal crisis: It is increasingly difficult to make adequate resources available for

agricultural extension. Financial pressures have in turn, led to the search for ways of

reducing public sector costs by privatizing parts of the extension service, having farmers

pay government for some services, and cost-sharing arrangements between government

and NGOs or farmers' organizations.


Changing contexts and opportunities: Opportunities for small farmers to acquire

technical information from sources other than the public sector have expanded rapidly.

The change has been most rapid with telecommunications: radio and television now

widely available in rural areas. Higher literacy levels and improvements in printing

technology have expanded the opportunities for the spread of technical information

through printed materials. There is growing evidence, though much of it from small-scale

projects implemented by NGOs, that participatory approaches enhance project benefits

and, in some cases, stimulates wider empowerment of rural communities.

Pressures towards participation and good governance: The range of participatory

methods is increasing. However, the evidence remains unclear on whether the additional

benefits of participatory approaches are sufficient to outweigh the costs, over what time

scale they might do so.

International developments: Liberalization of agricultural trade, consequent to the

WTO agreements has resulted in new opportunities and threats to Indian agriculture.

India is likely to gain in some crops, but consistent efforts for improving quality (to meet

international standards) and increasing cost effectiveness in these crops/products are

essential to achieve these. Liberalization of agricultural imports, which would gain further

momentum in the months to come, would subject our producers to competition from

outside. There is an urgent need to increase the competitiveness of Indian agro-products

and the role of agricultural extension would be very important.

Appraisal of Public Agricultural Extension System

Public agricultural extension system is a knowledge intensive organization, which is

involved in the production and dissemination of knowledge. Therefore, the success of this

organisation depends to a large extent on “knowledge management” and the major role of

its managers is to ensure that

Successful agricultural extension agencies are learning organizations

It gets relevant knowledge where ever it is produced

Staff members use their creativity to acquire/develop new knowledge

Staff members have access to all knowledge which is available in the organization

Learning from experience on how to develop more effective extension methods

Understand the changes happening in all the facets of rural life and apply

themselves for effective knowledge transfer applications

Stakeholder orientation of all the activities for efficient delivery of technologies

and adoption practices


The most important challenge for the future extension managers would be the

Management of Knowledge. The success of a farmer in the years to come is going to be

primarily dependent upon his level of knowledge. The real prices of agricultural products

are falling, because knowledge makes it possible to produce products with less land,

labour and other resources.

The objective of appraisal is to understand the present public extension system for

converting it in to a knowledge intensive, demand-driven, participatory, bottom-up, and a

relatively lean organization, which could efficiently respond to farmers’ extension and

training needs emerging as a result of globalization, market liberalization,

decentralization, and democratization, making use of information technology tools as far

as possible.

The role of agricultural extension in the next decade should be quite different

from what it was 10 years ago or even now. Its role as a facilitator of agricultural

knowledge system would only increase, as more participants from private sector would

get involved in extension. The public sector extension would still continue to be the major

extension provider in most parts of the country as the private sector alone would not be

able to meet even partially the varied needs of farmers. The ability of the system to

perform these roles would entirely depend on the pace of internal reforms, the system

would undergo. Experience the world over is that it is easy to change farmers than to

change government agencies. Internal reforms are thus going to be the greatest challenge

for the extension systems.

Therefore regular appraisal of the objectives and performance of the public

agricultural extension system in terms of fulfilling the needs and expectations of all the

stakeholders involved in the dynamic process is contributory not only to the future

planning activities of the government but also a great learning process for the

organization itself.

Case of Tamil Nadu

For a period of three decades, since the inception of T and V system, the State

Department of Agriculture has been rendering yeomen service to the farming community

and to the specific target groups. The services include technology dissemination, creation

of awareness leading to adoption looking into all possibilities for continuance.


Nevertheless, entangled with multifarious workload, and under the pressure of target-

oriented work, the system accomplishments have been to a significant level.

Despite, certain criticisms on their services, estimated to be dealing with only one

third of the farming community, the farmers have been reached with technologies

appropriate to the location, cultural, social and political milieu. One of the reasons for the

slow growth rate in agriculture is reported to be due to the non-reach of agricultural

extension field functionaries to the needy farmers in time and space. This is against the

fact that “Green Revolution” in Tamil Nadu was achieved through the efforts of research

agencies and the State Department of Agriculture. At the same time Tamil Nadu has to

achieve 4 per cent annual growth rate in agriculture and 8 per cent annual growth rate in

horticulture. To achieve this 4 per cent growth rate, besides the technology, functioning of

extension system is crucial. Hence it is essential to understand the functioning of State

Department of Agriculture in relation to its delivery, content, reach besides appraising the

problem encountered in functioning of the department, failing which any amount of

improvement in agricultural technology will not reach the needy farmers. Also it is to be

analyzed to what extent and how far their services have been recognized, the deficiency

felt by them, and any set backs to carry out their service effectively.

Keeping the above thinking in view, it is felt that the efficiency, effectiveness and

utility of the agricultural extension system are to be examined, apart from evaluating the

merits of the services in terms of content and delivery pertinent to the above parameters.

Hence the present study has been conceived with the following major objectives.

Objectives

i. to examine the efficiency, effectiveness and usefulness of the extension

services being rendered by the State Department of Agriculture;

ii. to assess the agricultural extension services in terms of content and delivery in

relevance to the different parameters; and

iii. to suggest suitable strategies to improve the functioning of Public Agricultural

Extension System in Tamil Nadu.


Chapter II

METHODOLOGY

The modernization and reform of the agricultural extension system is a major

undertaking requiring careful analysis of the situation, comprehension of the existing

policy on agricultural extension and the vision of development for over the next 20 years

or so, and finally taking bold policy decisions, some of which may have external

implications, cost considerable amounts in terms of time, money and energy, and require

effective monitoring of progress. It is therefore of paramount importance that the policy-

makers first have a look at the existing agricultural extension system to determine

whether the system needs to be reformed or not.

In order to conduct the appraisal study, a research plan was carefully laid out

taking in to account the geographical spread of the state, nature of crops grown in

different areas, resource endowments especially on the availability of water which is a

prime factor and moving force for the success of agriculture and agricultural extension.

Sufficient care was taken to cover the complete scenario of agricultural extension through

proper sampling methods and to obtain relevant data for meeting the objective

requirements of the study. The procedures adopted for sampling and the methods and

tools used for the analysis of the collected information are presented in the following

sections.

Sampling of Farmers

Selection of Districts:

There are totally 29 districts in the state. The districts were classified into

irrigated, irrigated dry and rain fed districts based on source of irrigation, percent area

under irrigation, and gross irrigated area. Five districts were chosen randomly under each

scenario of irrigation to carry out the study. Thus, totally fifteen districts was chosen for

the study.

Selection of Blocks in the short listed districts:

From the selected fifteen districts, four blocks were selected randomly. Totally

sixty blocks was selected for the study. The list of the selected districts and blocks are

provided in Tables 2.1 to 2.3.


Irrigated Scenario

Five districts namely, Thanjavur, Trichirapalli, Cuddalore, Thiruvarur and

Tirunelveli were selected for conduct of the study under irrigated scenario. The blocks

selected in each of these districts are presented in the table (Table 2.1).

Table 2.1 Districts and Blocks Selected under Irrigated Scenario

S.No Districts Blocks

1. Thanjavur Thiruvaiyaru, Ammapattai, Orathanadu,

Thirupananthal

2. Tiruchirapalli Musiri, Lalgudi, Andanallur,

Mannachanallur

3. Cuddalore Kattumannarkudi, Komarachi,

Vriddhachalam, Kammapuram

4. Thiruvarur Valangaiman, Mannarkudi, Thiruvaroor,

Kodavasal

5. Tirunelveli Kuruvikulam, Vasuthevanallur,

Sankarankoil, Melaneelethanallur

Irrigated Dry Scenario

Five districts namely, Erode, Salem, Coimbatore, Villupuram and Thiruvallur

were selected for conduct of the study under irrigated dry situation. The blocks selected in

each of these districts are presented in the Table 2.2.

Table 2.2 Districts and Blocks Selected under Irrigated Dry Scenario


1. Erode Bhavanisagar, Sathyamanagalam,

Perunthurai, Gobichettipalayam

2. Salem Veerapandi, Panamarathupatti,

Peddanaickenpalayam, Mecheri

3. Coimbatore

4. Villupuram Gingee, Vallam, Kolianur, Melmalaiyanur

5. Thiruvallur Thiruvallur , Thiruthani, Poonamalle,

Thiruvalaugadu

Dry Scenario

Five districts namely, Sivagangai,Perambalur, Dharmapuri, Thoothukudi and

Virudhunagar were selected for conduct of the study under dry situation. The blocks

selected in each of these districts are presented in the Table 2.3.


Table 2.3 Districts and Blocks Selected under Irrigated Dry Scenario


1. Sivagangai Tiruppathur, Kallal, Ilaiyankudi,

Kalayarkoil

2. Perambalur Ariyalur, Thirumanur, Sendurai,

Andimadam

3. Dharmapuri Pennagaram, Nallamballi, Palacode,

Morappur

4. Thoothukudi Kovilpatti, Puthur, Vilathikulam, Kayathar

5. Virudhunagar Sattur, Koviapatti, Aruppukottai,

Virudhunagar

Selection of Villages and Farm Households

One village from each selected block was again selected randomly and fifteen

farmers were randomly selected and interviewed personally. Therefore totally nine

hundred farmers representing the three irrigation scenarios were contacted for the study.

Details regarding the cropping pattern, services received from various extension agencies,

content of the technologies provided, mode of delivery of the same, the satisfaction level

of the farmers with regard to the content and delivery of the technologies by the field

functionaries etc, were collected from the farmers through a pre-tested questionnaire.

Sampling of Officials

Information for evaluation was collected from all the categories of officials of the

Department of Agriculture through a structured questionnaire as follows.

120 Assistant Agricultural Officers (2 per selected block)

120 Agricultural Officers/Agricultural Development Officers (2 per selected

block)

30 Assistant Directors of Agriculture (2 per selected district)

15 Deputy Directors of Agriculture (1 per selected district)

15 Joint Directors of Agriculture (1 per selected district)

Collection of data

The data required for the present study was collected through structured interview

schedule. The interview schedule was prepared based on the objectives of the study. The

farmers and officials were contacted personally and the objectives of the study were

explained to them to get their cooperation.


Statistical Tools used for analysis

The collected data was subjected to statistical analysis to estimate the required

parameters and to get the inference. The statistical analyses used were as follows.

Conventional analysis

Simple percentages and averages were worked out to study the characters like age

group of the sample farmers, family size of the sample farmers, educational status of the

sample farmers, farm size of the respondents, social participation of the sample farmers,

agricultural related institutional participation , exposure to mass media, reasons for lower

exposure, impact of relationship with officials of agriculture department officials,

participation level in the mass extension methods, reasons for non participation in

arranged extension activities, levels of satisfaction on information provided,

communication sources and levels of satisfaction, reasons for non satisfaction on sources

of communication, usefulness of the extension methods, quality of inputs, feed back,

monetary benefits and social benefits that reached them through the agricultural extension

system etc.

Multi dimensional scaling Technique

Summated scale was used to study the satisfaction level of the farmers with respect to

their relationship with officials, communication / information, effectiveness of the mode

of communication and also about the usefulness of the extension system.

A three-point scale (Highly satisfied, partially satisfied and not satisfied) was used. The

respondents were requested to indicate their satisfaction or non satisfaction about each

attribute by referring to a three point scale. From the scores obtained for each attribute,

the mean was calculated and interpreted to give the overall opinion of the sample

respondents about the attributes of the present public agricultural extension system.


CHAPTER III

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The first part of the chapter deals with the feed back analysis from the survey of

nine hundred farmers spread across fifteen districts as discussed earlier in the

methodology chapter meeting the requirements of the first objective of the study. The

second part of the results and discussion chapter presents the outcomes of the discussion

with the officials of the Department of Agriculture. The third part deals with the

guidelines and strategies that can be adopted for strengthening the present Agricultural

Extension system, taking in to account the field level constraints faced by the farmers and

the officials and the experience gained through the review of literature available in the

area of study.

The results of the study are presented and discussed under the following broad headings.

A. General characteristics, Exposure, Participation levels, Relationship with Officials

and levels of Satisfaction of the Farmers in the Irrigated environment

B. General characteristics, Exposure, Participation levels, Relationship with Officials and

Levels of Satisfaction of the Farmers in the Irrigated Dry Environment

C. General characteristics, Exposure, Participation levels, Relationship with Officials and

Levels of Satisfaction of the Farmers in the Dry Environment

D. Problems and constraints faced by the farmers in availing the Agricultural Extension

Services / Reasons for non Satisfaction of Farmers regarding Public Agricultural

Extension Services

E. Feed Back Analysis of the Officials of the Department of Agriculture

F. Guidelines and Strategies that can be adopted for Strengthening the Present

Agricultural Extension System in the State

A. General characteristics, Exposure, Participation levels, Relationship with

Officials and Levels of Satisfaction of the Farmers in the Irrigated

Environment

It is observed from Table 3.1 that nearly three fourth (65.0%) of the sample

farmers belonged to young to middle aged group, where as one third (35.0%) of them

were in the old aged group in the irrigated districts. It may be concluded that a

considerable proportion of the respondents were of effective and potential groups of

farmers who can adapt to the changes faster.


Table 3.1 Age Group of the Sample Farmers

S.No. Age Group No. %

1 Young (20 - 30 Years) 100 33.33

2 Middle (30-50 Years) 95 31.67

3 Old (>50 Years) 105 35.00

Total 300 100.00

Table 3.2 Family Size of the Sample Farmers

S.No. Family Size No. %

1 Small (Less than 4 members) 250 83.33

2 Large (>4 members) 50 16.67

Total 300 100.00

A glance at the Table 3.2 shows clearly that majority (83.33%) of the farmer

respondents belonged to small families where as, only one fifth (16.67%) of them

belonged to large families. In general, it may be inferred that a significant proportion of

them were having smaller size family which may result in a lesser participative attitude.

Table 3.3 Educational Status of the Sample Farmers

S.No. Educational Status No. %

1 Illiterate 30 10.00

2 Primary school 15 5.00

3 Middle school 100 33.33

4 High school 100 33.33

5 Higher secondary school 25 8.33

6 Degree 30 10.00

Total 300 100.00

Perusal of the Table 3.3 indicates that the educational status of the farmers was

only up to school level and only a lesser number of them acquired degrees. One third

(33.33%) of them had middle to high school education, and a lesser proportion of them

were illiterates, and belonged to other categories like primary and higher secondary. This

has a bearing on the type of extension method that can be promoted for better levels of

understanding and adoption.


Table 3.4 Farm Size of the Respondents

S.No. Farm Size No. %

1 Marginal (< 1ha) 155 51.67

2 Small (1-2Ha) 85 28.33

3 Medium (3-4Ha) 30 10.00

4 Large (>4Ha) 30 10.00

Total 300 100.00

From the table it is observed that majority of them were marginal and small

farmers (nearly 80%) and only one tenth of them came under medium to large. Therefore

suitable extension strategies are to be devised for targeting and meeting the needs of

numerous small and marginal farmers in the environment taking in to account their

financial position, cost of technology, labour requirement of the technology etc.

Table 3.5 Participation of the Sample Farmers in Panchayat Raj Institutions

S.No. Social Participation Level No. %

1 Low 224 74.67

2 Medium 48 16.00

3 High 28 9.33

Total 300 100

Socializing with people increases the exposure level and makes learning more

comprehensive. The levels of participation was arrived based on the participation of the

individual farmers in the various panchayat raj institutions and they were ranked low,

medium and high based on their active participation in these organizations and

associations. The study finds that three fourth of the sampled respondents extended low to

medium level of participation and only a meager proportion maintained and built in

higher level of participation.

It could be possibly so since they possessed small sized farms that too, with

copious water availability they would have been more involved with the farming

activities, restricting their active participation in societal gatherings. So it has to be

examined further whether such organizations/associations can be made a via media tool

for the application of extension tools.


Table 3.6 Agricultural related Institutional Participation

S.No. Level of Participation No. %

1 Low 261 87.00

2 Medium 32 10.67

3 High 7 2.33

Total 300 100.00

Attuned to the institutions like Farmers Discussion Group, Self Help Group, Non

Governmental Organizations, etc, would furnish first hand information about the

technologies generated and also the judicial application of chemicals, fertilizers and

strengthening their knowledge for enhancing scientific agriculture. To get to know on

these aspects, a majority (87.0%) of them had low level of accessibility and acquaintance

and only one tenth (12.0%) have had medium to high level of participation in such

institutions.

In general, it may be inferred that as most of them owned small sized farms, the

urge to gather information and knowledge from the agri-based institutions would not have

been more, thus justifying the result. At the same time, it also reveals the attitude of the

farmersof irrigated regions which makes agricultural extension a hard task.

Table 3.7 Exposure to Mass Media

S.No. Mass Media Sources Regular Occasionally Never

No. % No. % No. %

1 Farm news in AIR 35 11.67 170 56.67 95 31.67

2 Vayalum vazhvum 20 6.67 160 53.33 120 40.00

3 Agricultural news in Dailies 40 13.33 130 43.33 130 43.33

4 Agricultural magazines 18 6.00 52 17.33 230 76.67

Mass media exposure is the major source of information, because of its lower

cost. Of these sources, radio being the cheapest, the sample respondents were habituated

to listen to this media. But for now, the TV has gained momentum in disseminating

technologies and the significant proportion of farmers occasionally watched vayalum

vazhvum telecasted through television.

A considerable proportion was occasional readers of agricultural news in dailies.

As regards to agricultural magazines, due to its subscription cost and being small holders,

only a negligible percentage were regular readers of agricultural magazines.


Table 3.8 Primary Reason for lower exposure to mass media

S.No. Reasons

Farm news

in air

Vayalum

vazhvum

Agricultural

news

in dailies

Agricultural

magazines

No. % No. % No. % No. %

1 Lack of time 18 18.95 47 39.17 49 37.69 74 32.17

2 Not interested 14 14.74 32 26.67 31 23.85 46 20.00

3 Non availability of the

material/service 40 42.11 15 12.50 50 38.46 15 6.52

4 Messages given are not

practical 23 24.21 0 0.00 0 0.00 45 19.57

5 Information provided is not

useful 0 0.00 26 21.67 0 0.00 20 8.70

6 Unaware about its

availability 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 30 13.04

Total 95 100 120 100 130 100 230 100

Table 3.8 indicates the reasons for poor exposure of different mass media among

the farmer respondents of the irrigated districts. Among the various media sources, Farm

news in the AIR was more listened and only 95 farmers pointed out they do not listen to

the news. The primary reason was non availability of the equipment followed by the

impracticality of the messages. In the case of Vayalum vazhvum programme, the farmers

did not watch it because of the reasons of lack of time and poor interest. They perceive

TV as a medium of entertainment than an educational tool. In the case of agriculture news

in dailies and magazines lack of time, poor levels of interest and impracticality of

suggestions resulted in less exposure to the printed media sources. There were few

farmers who were not even aware of the agricultural magazines.

Table 3.9 Impact of Relationship with Officials of Agriculture Department

S.No. Factors Fully satisfied Satisfied

No. % No. %

1 Able to Maintain cordial

relationship 65 21.67 55 18.33

2 Awareness level increased 65 21.67 55 18.33

3 Strengthened further contact

process 65 21.67 55 18.33

Table 3.9 indicates the impact of relationship with officials of Agriculture

department. Out of the three hundred farmers, 120 farmers have expressed their

satisfaction on the impact of their relationship with the officials of the department. They


were satisfied in terms of the cordiality, due to which their awareness improved

strengthening the further contact process. In total, about 40 percent of the farmers were

satisfied on this aspect.

Table 3.10 Participation of the Sample Farmers in the Mass Extension Methods

S.No. Methods Participation

No.

Non

Participation

No.

%

Participation

Non participation 155 51.67

Participation (in all) 145 48.33

1 Meetings 30 270 10.00

2 Seminars 0 300 0.00

3 Method demonstrations 55 245 18.33

4 Campaigns 15 285 5.00

5 Exhibitions 40 260 13.33

6 Tours/field visit 0 300 0.00

7 Trainings 5 295 1.67

8.

Participated in more than

one method 20

Participation in any extension method would help the farmers to gain first hand

field experience, clarity on the methods of doing an operation, exposure on advanced

scientific farming, and wide range of ideas, skill acquisition, gain in knowledge,

inclination to novel ideas and thread bare comprehensibility of innovations. The

participation was better in the method demonstrations, exhibitions and meetings in that

order. The reasons for non participation were enquired with the farmers and only the

prime reasons as pointed out by them were given the importance and analysed in the

following tables (Tables 3.11 and 3.12).

While extending a cursory view into these tables, it is quite palpable that the

reasons evinced for non-participation in meetings were due to lack of time, non-provision

of earlier information, low level of interest and the like.

Similarities in opinions were also given by those who did not show interest in

participation of extension activities arranged. Contrarily, those who have not attended the

method demonstration had stated that they were not scheduled properly and the conduct

of those demonstrations has been erratic too. Non- attendees of campaigns also were of


the similar opinion to the other methods like meetings, seminars and method

demonstrations.

Table 3.11 Primary Reason for Non Participation in Arranged Extension Activities

S.No.

Reasons Meetings Seminars

Method

demonstrat

ion

Campaigns

No. % No. % No. % No. %

1. No time 95 35.19 40 13.33 105 42.00 40 14.04

2. Information not provided

earlier 75 27.78 205 68.33 60 24.00 130 45.61

3. Low level of Interest 40 14.81 55 18.33 43 17.20 50 17.54

4. Not relevant 55 20.37 0 0 0 0.00 0 0

5. Venue, time not properly

given 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 0

6. Did not conduct as per

schedule 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 65 22.81

7. Conducted during peak

season period 0 0.00 0 0 17 6.80 0 0

8. Message given are

theoretical 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 0 0

9. Conducted only for old and

unrelated technologies 5 1.85 0 0 20 10.00 0 0

Total 270 100.00 300 100 245 100 285 100

Table 3.11 Continued…

S.No.

Reasons Exhibitions

Tours/field

visit Trainings

No. % No. % No. %

1. No time 40 17.24 95 31.67 135 45.76

2. Information not provided earlier 125 44.83 165 55 30 10.17

3. Low level of Interest 0 0.00 40 13.33 50 16.95

4. Not relevant 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0

5. Venue, time not properly given 0 0.00 0 0.00 80 27.12

6. Did not conduct as scheduled 55 22.41 0 0.00 0 0

7. Conducted during peak season

period 18 6.9 0 0.00 0 0

8. Message given are theoretical 0 0 0 0.00 0 0

9. Conducted only for old and

unrelated technologies 22 8.62 0 0.00 0 0

Total 260 100 300 100 295 100

A negligible proportion of farmers have felt that demonstrations were not

conducted in leisure time, but only in peak season. A minimum percentage also indicated


that most of the mass extension methods like meetings and method demonstration were

conducted only displaying old and unrelated technologies and that is a reason why they

have not participated, even though it is being conducted for the benefit of farmers. In

general, it may be concluded only the irrationality of conduct of extension methods lead

the people for non-participation.

From table 3.12 it is evident that the reasons for non-participation of arranged

extension activities were consolidated to declare the reluctance of participation in

exhibitions, tours and trainings. Lack of time, non-provision of earlier information, low

level of interest, untimely venue, improper schedule of time, conduct of trainings,

exhibitions at peak time, and conduct of only old and unrelated technologies were the

reasons specified in varied magnitudes. In general it may be inferred that lack of fitting

time and improper planning only made the farmers deterred to attend to main extension

methods.

Table 3.12 Levels of Satisfaction on Information provided

S.No. Attributes of Satisfaction

Fully

satisfied Satisfied

Not

Participated/

Not satisfied

No. % No. % No. %

1

Motivation through face to face

contact 35 11.67 90 30 175 58.33

2

Orientation towards Information

sources 20 6.67 100 33.33 180 60.00

3 Method of communication 20 6.67 100 33.33 180 60.00

4 Knowledge gained out of meetings 0 0 30 10.00 270 90.00

5 Skills gained out of demonstrations 0 0 50 16.67 250 83.33

6

Messages relevant to season and

time 55 18.33 65 21.67 180 60.00

7 Any Information of new crops 60 20 60 20 180 60.00

8 Message given is compatible 40 13.33 80 26.67 180 60.00

9 Information on market 55 18.33 65 21.67 180 60.00

10 Information on credit facilities 50 16.67 70 23.33 180 60.00

11 Timeliness of Information provided 55 18.33 65 21.67 180 60.00

While assessing the sampled farmers on various factors of satisfaction, almost one

third of them were fully to moderately satisfied due to the face to face contact, orientation

towards sources, methods of communication and one fourth of them were satisfied with

the knowledge gained out of meetings, relevant messages for time and session,

compatible messages, information of new crops, marketing information, information on


credit facilities, timelines of information provided and skills gained out of

demonstrations. As majority have not participated, their dissatisfaction was also

significant. In general it may be concluded that levels of satisfaction was optimal on the

information provided in the extension activities.

Table 3.13 Communication Sources and Levels of Satisfaction

S.No. Sources Fully satisfied Satisfied

Not

Participated/Not

satisfied

No. % No. % No. %

1 Oral communication 10 3.33 110 36.67 180 60

2 Demonstration 0 0 55 18.33 245 81.67

3 Leaflet 0 0 0 0 300 100

4 Pamphlet 0 0 0 0 300 100

5 Folders 0 0 0 0 300 100

6 Books 0 0 0 0 300 100

7 Radio 35 11.67 170 56.67 95 31.67

8 Television 20 6.67 120 40 160 53.33

9 Computer 0 0 0 0 300 100

10 Recent electronic tools 0 0 0 0 300 100

While observing the levels of satisfaction with regard to the sources of

communication, from the table 3.13, it is quite tangible that radio and television sources

of delivery of message had given the maximum satisfaction followed by oral

communication, which may be through personal contacts.

As most of the farmers have owned only small farms, their desire to obtain

information from the print media sources have been almost zero, where the literature

sources like leaflet, folders, books, pamphlet have not at all contributed for their

satisfaction. In general it may be inferred that only mass media sources have created more

gratification compared to print and ICT enabled tools like computer etc.


Table 3.14 Reasons for Dissatisfaction on the Sources of Communication

3.14.1. Oral communication

S.No. Reasons No. %

1 Not Attended 180 60.00

2 Not provided for all crops 75 25.00

3 Not provided on time 45 15.00

Total 300 100.00

The results of the table 3.14.1, clearly brings in the dissatisfaction on the sources

of communication.

A majority (60.00%) of the respondents have not participated in the meetings,

when oral communication was the mode of information dissemination. Only one fourth

(25.0%) of them have had the complaint that they could not receive oral communication

for all the crops and that too they were not provided on time (15.00%).

In general, it may be implied that the over all utilization and satisfaction over the

oral communication efforts were bleak and untimely proclamation of oral ideas/messages

have not benefited such, as reported by the sampled respondents.

3.14.2. Demonstration

S.No. Reasons No. %


2 Not extended for all the crops 55 18.33

Total 300 100.00

With respect to demonstration, it is observed from the table 3.14.2 that a telling

majority (81.67%) of the respondents has not attended the demonstrations, specifically

conducted for them and nearly one fifth (18.33%) have reported that those demonstrations

did not cover the topics of all crops.

In general, it may be concluded that the lack of participation and inadequate

coverage of the extended crop technologies, have restrained the farmers to attend the

demonstrations and brought in much dissatisfaction.


3.14.3. Leaflet

S.No. Reasons No. %

1 Not distributed 245 81.67


3 Necessary information are not available 5 1.67

Total 60 100.00

Observing the table 3.14.3, it is obvious that the written publications like leaflet

have not been distributed (81.67%) and did not contain information for all the crops

(16.67%). It was also felt that necessary information were not available to the respondents

in the leaflets distributed.

3.14.4. Pamphlet

S.No. Reasons No. %

1 Not given 275 91.67



Total 300 100.00

An over-view on the table 3.14.4, states that a thumping majority (91.67%)

reported that the reasons for the dissatisfaction on the written sources like pamphlet, was

that they were not distributed to them. Only a negligible percentage (5.00%) of them said

that these pamphlets carrying information was not provided for all crops and that too

necessary information were lacking (3.33%). In general it may be inferred that the

pamphlet also did not reach the farmers as an extension tool. Similarly folders also did

not reach the needy farmers as indicated in Table 3.14.5

3.14.5. Folders

S.No. Reasons No. %

1 Not given 290 96.67


Total 300 100.00

3.14.6. Radio

S.No. Reasons No. %


2 Necessary information are not given 30 31.58

3 Its more theoretical 5 5.26

Total 95 100.00


The table 3.14.6 states that majority (63.16%) of the sampled respondents said

that radio information were not provided for all the crops and that too necessary

information was lacking. More so, the information supplied through radio medium,

lacked practicality.

3.14.7. Television

S.No. Reasons No. %


2 Timing of programmes are not convenient 45 28.13


Total 160 100.00

While analyzing the reasons for dissatisfaction, majority (58.75%) of them stated

that the television has not provided information for all crops and the time of telecast was

very inconvenient for them, as observed from table 7. The information also lacked

practicality (13.13%) and these reasons made them dissatisfied.

3.14.8. Computer and Electronic Tools

S.No. Reasons No. %

1 Not available 300 100.00

Dissatisfaction on the ICT sources was due to their non availability in the village

(100%) as seen from the Table 3.14.8.

Table 3.15 Usefulness of the Extension Methods

n = 120

S.No. Usefulness Yes (No.)

1 Doubts or queries are fully clarified 120

2 Would you like to adopt the recommended technologies 105

3 The technologies are the latest 115

4 The technologies are need based 120

5 The technologies are cost effective 105

6 Clarity in the messages 120

7 The Information given are profit oriented 115

It is seen from the table 3.15 that out of the 145 farmers who attended the

meetings, seminars, demonstrations and the like, 105 to 120 farmers were satisfied with


its utility ie. the satisfied respondents in the participatory group were 90 per cent. Hence

problems lie not in the content and delivery of the information but with the non

participation of the farmers in such extension methods.

Table 3.16 Quality of inputs

S.No. Quality Aspects Yes No

No. % No. %

1 Quality of seed is good 135 45.00 165 55.00

2 Quality of fertilizers is good 70 23.33 230 76.67

3 Quality of plant protection chemicals is good 0 0.00 300 100.00

4 Quality of machinery is good 45 15.00 255 85.00

From the table 3.16, it is revea led that a less than half (45.00%) of them

replied that the quality of seeds was good and one fourth (23.33%) said that they could

get good quality fertilizers. None of them obtained good quality plant protection

chemicals and the quality of machinery was also not desirable. In general, it may be

implied that the quality of chemicals / fertilizers were not at all good as opined by a

majority and only seeds supplied were of good quality.

Table 3.17 Feed back

n = 120

S. No. Feed back attributes* Fully satisfied Satisfied

No. % No. %

1 The Extension Officials listen to your voice 0 0 25 8.33

2

Follow up of the recommendations for

sustenance 0 0 20 6.67

* There was zero level of satisfaction on the attributes like message is taken for further

research consultation, consultation for refinement of technology, participation in any

technology invention.

Feed back is to be effective to refine any technology for further research. To give

an effective feed back, the farmers’ problem and issues are to be adequately addressed

and brought back to research area for further modifications. It could be seen from the

table 3.17 that only a maximum of 9 per cent of the farmers out of the 120 farmers who

came in to contact with the officials felt that the feed back is accepted and further taken

up by the officials.


In general, it may be inferred, much more endeavors are to be taken by extension

officials to carry the messages from the farmers to the scientists to make the technology

tailor made and reduce the gap, by providing information for further research, fine tuning

of existing ideas and also involving farmers for technology invention through active

involvement by rendering feed back, appropriately and precisely.

Table 3.18 Monetary benefits

n = 120

S.No. Benefits

Fully

satisfied Satisfied

Not

satisfied

No. % No. % No. %

1

Yield improvement due to the

technology adopted 20 16.67 85 70.83 15 12.50

2 Cost effectiveness 15 12.50 85 70.83 20 16.67

3 Exposure to credit institutions 15 12.50 65 54.17 40 33.33

4 Received market information 20 16.67 75 62.50 25 20.83

5 Received Agri business information 20 16.67 45 37.50 55 45.83

6 Technologies introduced reduce labour 5 4.17 10 8.33 105 87.50

.

The table 3.18 obviously shows that out of the 120 farmers who actively

participated in the extension process, the range of non satisfaction was from 15 to 55 per

cent on the perceived benefits out of the extension system in the irrigated environment.

Over all, the satisfaction level was high on these aspects. The problem lies with the non

participating group of farmers who do not really perceive the positive benefits bestowed

by the system. Thus, it may be inferred that much more efforts are to be made to make the

services bring adequate accountability and render benefits to the farming community in a

more broader way.

Table 3.19 Social benefits

n = 120

S.No. Benefits

Fully

satisfied Satisfied Not satisfied

No. % No. % No. %

1 Exposure to government schemes 15 12.5 80 66.67 15 12.50

2 Awareness on crop insurance 0 0 75 25.00 20 16.67

3 Eco friendly technologies 0 0 50 16.67 120 100.00

4 Social recognition 0 0 0 0 120 100.00


It could be seen from the table 3.19 the perceived social benefits that reached the

farmers due to their exposure to the agricultural extension system. It could be seen from

the table that the eco-friendly technologies and the social recognition received was not

satisfying at all where as the sizeable number of farmers are exposed to the government

schemes and crop insurance. In general, it may be inferred that there was no social

recognition and the social benefits in general were also low, on account of the services

bestowed for them.

B. General characteristics, Exposure, Participation levels, Relationship with

Officials and Levels of Satisfaction of the Farmers in the Irrigated Dry

Environment

In an effort to understand the impact of agricultural extension system in the irrigated dry

environment of the state, five districts namely Erode, Coimbatore, Salem, Villupuram and

Thiruvallur districts were selected from where three hundred farmers were interviewed

and the collected information is analysed, presented and discussed in the following tables.



1 Young (20 - 30 Years) 10 3.33

2 Middle (30-50 Years) 130 43.33

3 Old (>50 Years) 160 53.33

Total 300 100

The majority of sample respondents belong to the old and middle age group. It

could be seen that young farmers constituted only (3.33%) of the total sample respondents

indicating the lower preference of young generation in taking of farming activities in the

irrigated dry districts selected for the study. Therefore, the extension method and delivery

system have to the designed taking in to account the older farmers who have very specific

preferences.


Table 3.21 Family Size of the Sample Farmers




Total 300 100

It could be seen from the table that, 88 per cent of the farmers had smaller

families. The number of smaller families in the irrigated dry environment is higher than

the irrigated environment and vice versa in the case of larger families.



1 Illiterate 50 10

2 Primary 80 5

3 Middle 50 33.33


5 Higher secondary 5 8.33

6 Degree 35 10

Total 300 100

Most of the sample respondents had an educational level of middle to high school.

A meager percentage of farmers had higher secondary to degree level education. The

trend was similar to the irrigated environment and the extension methods should target

this level of education with suitable tools.



1 Marginal (< 1ha) 90 30

2 Small (1-2Ha) 120 40

3 Medium (3-4Ha) 55 18.33

4 Large (>4Ha) 35 11.67

Total 300 100

It could be seen from table 3.23, that a majority of sample respondents belonged

to small and marginal farmers’ category (70.00%). The rest 30 per cent were medium and

large farmers. The trend was similar to irrigated conditions but the proposition of medium


and large farmers was higher than the irrigated condition. Here the different extension

methods followed should have a more balanced approach.


S.No. Social Participation No. %

1 Low 280 93.33

2 Medium 12 4.00

3 High 8 2.67

Total 300 100.00


comprehensive. The levels of participation in Panchayat Raj Institutions were arrived

based on the participation of the individual farmers and they were ranked low, medium

and high based on their participation. In all, only about seven per cent of the respondents

had some kind of participation. Social participation is an index of social behavior leading

to participation and consultations with the peers which will serve as an effective farmer to

farmer system of extension.

Table 3.25 Agricultural Related Institutional Participation


1 Low 290 96.67

2 Medium 6 2.00

3 High 4 1.33

Total 300 100

The institutional participation of sample farmers was found to be low. The

institutional participation could enhance the knowledge, skill and participatory behavior

of the farmers. The low level of participation indicated lesser interest on the part of

farmers to learn from such structured institutions.



S.No. Mass Media Sources Regular Occasionally Never

No. % No. % No. %

1 Farm news in AIR 30 10 134 44.67 126 42

2 Vayalum vazhvum 20 6.67 142 47.33 138 46

3

Agricultural news in

Dailies 30 10 102 34 168 56

4 Agricultural magazines 30 10 125 41.67 145 48.33

The vayalum vazhvum programme telecasted found the highest viewer ship

among the mass media sources followed by farm news in AIR, agricultural magazines

and agricultural news in dailies. Most of the farmers (52.00%) never attempted to read the

agricultural news in dailies and the magazines. It was also seen from the table that major

percentage of the farmers were exposed to the mass media sources occasionally rather

than regularly and never. The trend was similar to that of the irrigated situation.


S.No. Reasons

Farm news

in air

Vayalum

vazhvum

Agricultural

news

in dailies

Agricultural

magazines

No. % No. % No. % No. %

1 Lack of time 76 60.32 75 54.35 63 37.50 45 31.03

2 Not interested 25 19.84 23 16.67 45 26.79 20 13.79

3

Non availability of

the material/

service 15 11.90 18 13.04 36 21.43 14 9.66

4

Messages given are

not practical 10 7.94 0 0.00 24 14.29 42 28.97

5

Information

provided is not

useful 0 0.00 22 15.94 0 0.00 14 9.66

6

Unaware about its

availability 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 10 6.90

Total 126 100.00 138 100.00 168 100.00 145 100.00

Table 3.27 indicates the different reasons reported by farmers who were never

exposed to the mass media sources. It could be seen from the table that lack of time and

no interest were the major factors that resulted in lower exposure to farm news in AIR.

The same factors were found to be the major reasons in the case of other mass media


sources like vayalum vazhvum, news in dailies and magazines. The messages given are

not practical was one of the major reason for the low exposure to agricultural magazines.

A good proportion of the farmers (21.00%) pointed out the non availability of material /

service as another reason for the less exposure to the mass media.

Table 3.28 Participation of the sample farmers in the Mass Extension Methods

S.No.

Participation No. Non

Participation

% of

Participation

Non participation 105 35

Participation (in all) 195 (175+20) 65

1 Meetings 45 255 15.00

2 Seminars 20 285 6.67


4 Campaigns 5 295 1.67




8.

Attended more than one

method 20

It could be seen from table 3.28, that a majority of sample respondents have

participated in the mass extension methods prompted by the department. Among the

different methods, exhibition was found to be the most attractive method for the farmers.

Method demonstration and the meetings were attended by about 13 per cent and 15 per

cent of the sample respondents respectively. It could also be understood that the

participation level in the mass extension methods were higher compared to the irrigated

environment.


n = 175

S.No.

Factors

Fully satisfied Satisfied Not Satisfied

No. % No. % No. %


relationship 40 22.86 50 28.57 85 48.57

2 Awareness level increased 40 22.86 45 25.71 90 51.43


process 30 17.14 45 25.71 100 57.14


It could be seen from the table 3.29 that only 50 per cent of the sample

respondents who were involved in some kind of extension process, were able to maintain

a cordial relationship with the department officials. The rest 50 per cent of sample

respondents were not satisfied with the kind of relationship they had with department

officials. It could be understood that the percentage of non satisfaction is higher than the

irrigated environment.

Table 3.30 Participation of the sample farmers in the Mass Extension Methods

S.No. Participation No. Non

Participation

% of

Participation

Non participation 105 35

Participation (in all) 195 (175+20) 65

1 Meetings 45 255 15.00

2 Seminars 20 285 6.67






8.

Attended more than one

method 20

It could be seen from table 3.30, that a majority of sample respondents have

participated in the mass extension methods prompted by the department. Among the

different methods, exhibition was found to be the most attractive method for the farmers.

Method demonstration and the meetings were attended by about 13 per cent and 15 per

cent of the sample respondents respectively. It could also be understood that the

participation level in the mass extension methods were higher compared to the irrigated

environment.




Method

demonstration Campaigns

No. % No. % No. % No. %

1 No time 65 30.23 64

13.3

3 75 28.85 65 22.03

2 Information not

provided earlier 45 20.93 119

68.3

3 45 17.31 98 33.22

3 Low level of Interest 40 18.60 35

18.3

3 69 26.54 69 23.39

4 Not relevant 25 11.63 18 0 0 0.00 0 0.00

5 Venue, time not

properly given 0 0.00 15 0 24 9.23 0.00

6 Did not conduct as

per schedule 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 63 21.36

7 Conducted during

peak season period 20 9.30 0 0 12 4.62 0 0.00

8 Message given are

theoretical 15 6.98 24 0 0 0.00 0 0.00

9

Conducted only for

old and unrelated

technologies 5 2.33 0 0 35 13.46 0 0.00

Total 215 100 275 100 260 100 295 100

The primary reason for non participation the arranged extension activities was

elicited from the sample respondents. In the case of meeting, non availability of time and

improper information resulted in non participation. Majority of non participants were not

informed about the conduct of the seminars in advance. In case of method demonstration,

lack of time, poor interest and improper information were found to be reason for non

participation. About 33 per cent of the non participations indicated the improper

information for not attending the campaigns followed by low level of interest and lack of

time.

In the case of exhibition, lack of time was found to be the major reasons for non

participation where as improper information and lack of time were found to be the major

reasons for non participation in tours/ field visits. In the case of trainings, lack of time and

poor level of interest were found to be the major reasons.


Table 3.31 Continued…

S.No.

Reasons Exhibitions

Tours/field

visit Trainings

No. % No. % No. %

1 No time 120 52.17 97 33.45 85 28.81

2 Information not provided

earlier 20 8.70 110 37.93 42 14.24

3 Low level of Interest 23 10.00 45 15.52 78 26.44

4 Not relevant 0 0.00 0 0.00 28 9.49

5 Venue, time not properly

given 12 5.22 15 5.17 42 14.24


scheduled 15 6.52 0 0.00 20 6.78

7 Conducted during peak

season period 18 7.83 23 7.93 0 0.00

8 Message given are

theoretical 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

9

Conducted only for old

and unrelated

technologies 22 9.57 0 0.00 0 0.00

Total 230 100.00 290 100.00 295 100.00

Among these reasons, improper information, conducting the events during peak season

period, conducting only for old and unrelated technologies are to be looked in detail by

the department officials for improving the rate of participation of the farmers in the

arranged extension activities.



S.No. Attributes of Satisfaction

Fully

satisfied Satisfied

Not

Participated/

Not satisfied

No. % No. % No. %

1 Motivation through face to

face contact 35 20.00 45 25.71 95 54.29

2 Orientation towards

Information sources 35 20.00 45 25.71 95 54.29

3 Method of communication 35 20.00 45 25.71 95 54.29

4 Knowledge gained out of

meetings 30 17.14 30 17.14 115 65.71

5 Skills gained out of

demonstrations 15 8.57 35 20.00 125 71.43

6 Messages relevant to season

and time 15 8.57 50 28.57 110 62.86

7 Any Information of new crops 15 8.57 45 25.71 115 65.71

8 Message given is compatible 25 14.29 25 14.29 125 71.43

9 Information on market 5 2.86 25 14.29 145 82.86

10 Information on credit facilities 5 2.86 20 11.43 150 85.71

11 Timeliness of Information

provided 15 8.57 30 17.14 130 85.00

Table 3.32 indicates the levels of satisfaction regarding the information provided

by the department officials during the course of extension activities. The levels of

satisfaction was found to be better through face to face motivation and communication

methods, where as majority of the farmers were not satisfied with respect to the provision

of market information, credit sources and timeliness of other information pertaining to the

crop production. As majority have not participated, their dissatisfaction was also

significant.



S.No. Sources

Fully

satisfied Satisfied

Not

Participated/Not

satisfied

No. % No. % No. %

1 Oral communication 25 14.29 40 22.86 110 62.86

2 Demonstration 10 5.71 20 11.43 145 82.86

3 Leaflet 5 2.86 10 5.71 160 91.43

4 Pamphlet 0 0.00 5 2.86 170 97.14

5 Folders 0 0.00 5 2.86 170 97.14

6 Books 0 0.00 5 2.86 170 97.14

7 Radio 30 17.14 40 22.86 105 60.00

8 Television 20 11.43 80 45.71 75 42.86

9 Computer 0 0.00 0 0.00 175 100.00

10 Recent electronic tools 0 0 0 0 300 100

About ten different sources of communication were identified in discussion with

the officials of the department of agriculture and the farmers (Table 3.33). Among all the

sources, television, oral communication, radio were found to be most influencing and

satisfying communication sources for sample respondents. It was pointed out by the

sample respondents that computer and other electronic tools were never used for

communication. The printed publication like leaflets, pamphlets, folders and books

reached a very meager number of the sample respondents.

Table 3.34 Reasons for Dissatisfaction on Sources of Communication


S.No. Reasons No. %

1 Not Attended 225 75

2 Not provided for all crops 60 20

3 Not provided in time 15 5

Total 300 100



S.No. Reasons No. %

1 Not Attended 210 70

2 Not extended for all the crops 90 30

Total 300 100

In the case of demonstration, 30 per cent of sample respondents felt that it was not

being extended for the all the crops and the rest 70% did not attend the demonstrations at

all.

3.34.3. Leaflet

S.No. Reasons No. %




Total 300 100.00

The major complaint of the farmers on the leaflets was that, it was not provided

for all the crops and most of the times all the necessary information are not available.

3.34.4. Pamphlet

S.No. Reasons No. %

1 Not given 210 70


3 Necessary information are not available 60 20

Total 300 100

A majority (70.00%) of farmers are expressed that they were never given with the

pamphlets. The rest 30 per cent were critical on the non availability of necessary

information and coverage of crops.

3.34.5. Folders

S.No. Reasons No. %

1 Not given 210 70


Total 300 100


In the case of folders, majority of the sample respondents (70 per cent) did not

receive any type of folders from the department whereas the rest 30% of the farmers

indicated that it was not being distributed for all the crops.

3.34.6. Radio

S.No. Reasons No. %




Total 270 100.00

In the case of radio, about 75 per cent of farmers complained that the coverage of

crops was inadequate and the rest 25 per cent of the sample respondents felt that

necessary information were not given and the given information was more theoretical.

3.34.7. Television

S.No. Reasons No. %




Total 280 100

In the case of television, majority of the farmers (73%) indicated inadequate crop

coverage as the major reason for non satisfaction followed by inconvenient timings and

theoretical orientation of the telecasted programmes.

The computer and other modern electronic tools were never used by the

department officials in disseminating the information. This was indicated by all the

sample respondents of the irrigated dry environment.



n = 175

S.No. Usefulness Yes

No. %

1 Doubts or queries are fully clarified 80 45.71

2

Would you like to adopt the

recommended technologies 80 45.71

3 The technologies are the latest 70 40.00

4 The technologies are need based 70 40.00

5 The technologies are cost effective 70 40.00

6 Clarity in the messages 70 40.00

7

The Information given are profit

oriented 70 40.00

It could be seen from the table 3.35, the ways through which the extension

methods adopted by the department are useful to the farmers. Seven different areas were

identified and the farmers were asked to express the usefulness about each area. About

forty five to forty per cent of the participating farmers have responded that the system is

useful in terms of clarifying the doubts, provision of latest need based, cost effective

technologies which are profit oriented. The messages delivered also lack clarity. Nearly

forty five per cent of farmer respondents had positive inclination to adopt the

recommended technologies.


S.No.

Quality Aspects

Yes No

No. % No. %



3

Quality of plant protection chemicals is

good 65 21.67 235 78.33


Different inputs are provided by the agricultural department through various

schemes to the farmers. The majority of the farmers respondents (52.00%) have felt the

quality of seed being distributed was good. However, about three fourths of the farmers

were critical of the quality of plant protection chemicals, fertilizer and other machineries

that are distributed through the department of agriculture.



n = 175

S.No.

Feed back attributes

Fully satisfied Satisfied

No. % No. %

1

The Extension Officials listen to

your voice 25 14.29 30 17.14

2

Follow up of the recommendations

for sustenance 20 11.43 25 14.29

3

Message is taken for further

research consultation 10 5.71 10 5.71

4

Consultation for refinement of

technology 5 2.86 10 5.71

5

Have you participated in any

technology invention 5 2.86 10 5.71

Feed back was received from the sample respondents on their communication

with the extension officials. About thirty one per cent of respondents were satisfied with

the way the officials listened to their voice, where as only twenty five per cent were

satisfied with the follow up action of the officials. About eleven per cent of the

respondents were not convinced about the message being taken for further research to

refine the technology or for any kind of technology invention.


n = 175

S.No. Benefits Fully satisfied Satisfied

No. % No. %

1


technology adopted 20 11.43 35 20.00

2 Cost effectiveness 20 11.43 35 20.00

3 Exposure to credit institutions 10 5.71 15 8.57

4 Received market information 10 5.71 10 5.71

5

Received Agri business

information 10 5.71 10 5.71

6

Technologies introduced reduce

labour 10 5.71 10 5.71

The farmer respondents were asked to identify the monetary benefits that could

accrue to them through the advice and adoption of recommendations of the officials of the

Department of agriculture. About thirty two per cent of the farmers respondents were

satisfied on the yield improvement due to the technology adopted and the cost

effectiveness of the technology. Majority of the sample respondents were of the view that


the extension system did not expose them properly to credit institutions, market

information and business information. They were also of the view the technologies

introduced did not reduce the labour requirements.



No. % No. %

1

Exposure to government

schemes 10 5.71 35 20.00

2

Awareness on crop

insurance 10 5.71 10 5.71

3 Eco friendly technologies 10 5.71 15 8.57

4 Social recognition 10 5.71 15 8.57

The farmers were asked to express the satisfaction on the social benefits that

accrued to them through intervention of Department of Agriculture. A majority of the

sample respondents have expressed that they are not being properly exposed to the

government schemes, crop insurance and eco friendly technologies. They were also not

satisfied with the social recognition that they get for being in touch with the Department

of Agriculture.

C. General characteristics, Exposure, Participation levels, Relationship with

Officials and Levels of Satisfaction of the Farmers in the Dry Environment

In an effort to understand the impact of agricultural extension system in the dry

environment of the state, five districts namely, Sivagangai, Perambalur, Dharmapuri,

Thoothukudi and Virudhunagar were selected from where three hundred farmers were

interviewed and the collected information is analysed, presented and discussed in the

following tables.



1 Young (20 - 30 Years) 45 15.00

2 Middle (30-50 Years) 90 30.00

3 Old (>50 Years) 165 55.00

Total 300 100


It could be seen from the table 3.40, that 85 per cent of farmers belonged to the old and

middle aged group. The proportion of middle and old aged group farmers is lower than

the other two environments namely the irrigated and irrigated dry.

Table 3.41. Family Size of the Sample Farmers




Total 300 100

It could be seen from the table 3.41 that about eighty per cent of the farmers had

smaller families and the rest twenty per cent of large families. The proportion of joint /

large families is higher in this environment compared to the other two environments.



1 Illiterate 55 18.33

2 Primary 85 28.33

3 Middle 75 25.00


5 Higher secondary 15 5.00

6 Degree 10 3.33

Total 300 100.00

It could be seen from the table 3.42 higher level of illiteracy is prevalent among

the sample respondents in this environment. Only a meager eight per cent of the

respondents had higher secondary and degree level education. This is in contrast to the

irrigated and irrigated dry environments where one could find better levels of education.

It is imperative to take into account this fact in devising and designing suitable extension

methods for dissemination of information.




1 Marginal (< 1ha) 93 31.00

2 Small (1-2Ha) 97 32.33

3 Medium (3-4Ha) 82 27.33

4 Large (>4Ha) 28 9.33

Total 300 100.00

The above table indicates the farm size of the sample respondents. It could be seen

from the table that the proportion of small and marginal farmers (63.00%) was lesser

compared to the other two environments. The proportion of medium and larger farmers

were higher (37.00%) in this environment.


S.No. Social Participation No. %

1 Low 295 98.33

2 Medium 5 1.67

3 High 0 0.00

Total 300 100.00


comprehensive. The levels of social participation was arrived based on the participation

of the individual farmers in the various panchayat raj institutions and they were ranked

low, medium and high based on their active participation. The table 3.44 indicates very

low levels of social participation among the sample respondents. This is against the fact

that the irrigated environment had the highest level of social participation followed by

better level of participation in the irrigated dry environment.

Table 3.45 Agricultural Related Institutional Participation


1 Low 296 98.67

2 Medium 4 1.33

3 High 0 0.00

Total 300 100


The table indicates the agricultural related institutional participation of sample

respondents. The institutional participation could enhance the knowledge, skill and

participatory behavior of the farmers. The participation was found to be very low

compared to the other two environments.


S.No. Mass Media Sources

Regular Occasionally Never

No. % No. % No. %

1 Farm news in AIR 10 3.33 85 28.33 205 68.33

2 Vayalum vazhvum 7 2.33 120 40.00 173 57.67

3 Agricultural news in Dailies 5 1.67 93 31.00 202 67.33

4 Agricultural magazines 3 1.00 10 3.33 287 95.67

The exposure to mass media was highest through the vayalum vazhvum

programme followed by the agricultural news in dailies and farm news in AIR. The

exposure was limited through the agricultural magazines. It could be understood the

proportion of no exposure to mass media was the highest in this environment compared to

the other two environments. About 58 – 96 per cent of respondents have never been

exposed to these four important mass media sources that exist for agriculture.

In a situation of very low participation in panchayat raj and other agri related institutions

and a very little exposure to mass media in relation to agriculture makes public extension

system very difficult to play its role.



S.No.

Reasons

Farm news

in air

Vayalum

vazhvum

Agricultural

news

in dailies

Agricultural

magazines

No. % No. % No. % No. %

1 Lack of time 55 26.83 58 33.53 40 19.80 76 26.48

2 Not interested 84 40.98 38 21.97 62 30.69 55 19.16

3

Non availability

of the material/

service 53 25.85 42 24.28 44 21.78 72 25.09

4

Messages given

are not practical 8 3.90 20 11.56 26 12.87 12 4.18

5

Information

provided is not

useful 0 0.00 15 8.67 20 9.90 14 4.88

6

Unaware about its

availability 5 2.44 0 0.00 10 4.95 58 20.21

Total 205 100.00 173 100.00 202 100.00 287 100.00

The study tried to identify the reasons for no exposure to the four important mass

media sources. In the case of farm news, most of the respondents were not interested, they

lacked time and lacked the availability of material / services. The percentage of

respondents who were not interested is alarmingly high in this environment compared to

the other two environments. In the case of vayalum vazhvum programme in television,

lack of time and required material/ service were found to be major reasons for poor

exposure. The proportion of non availability of material / service was highest among the

three environments. In the case of agricultural news in dailies, 31 per cent of the farmers

were not interested and about the twenty two per cent of the farmers were not able to get

the required material.


Table 3.48 Participation level in the Mass Extension Methods

S.No. Participation No. Non

Participation %

Non participation 214 71.33

Participation (in all) 86(75+11) 28.67

1 Meetings 9 291 3.00

2 Seminars 9 291 3.00






It could be seen from the table 3.48 that only 29.00% sample respondents

participated in the mass extension methods of the department of agriculture. Among the

participants, exhibition was found to be the most preferred method followed by method

demonstration, meetings, seminars and field visits. The proportion of non participation

again is very high in comparison to the other two environments.


n = 75

S.No.

Factors

Fully

satisfied Satisfied

Not

satisfied

No. % No. % No. %


relationship 5 6.67 16 21.33 54 72.00

2 Awareness level increased 5 6.67 16 21.33 54 72.00


process 5 6.67 16 21.33 54 72.00

The above table 3.49 indicates that only (27.00%) of the sample respondents

maintained a cordial relationship with the officials that resulted in better awareness and

strengthening of contact process. The rest (73.00 %) were not satisfied with kind of

relationship with the officials. It could be understood the proportion of unsatisfied

farmers was higher compared to the other two environments.



S.No.


Method

demonstration Campaigns

No. % No. % No. % No. %

1 No time 21 7.22 14 13.33 23 8.30 29 9.76

2 Information not

provided earlier 6 2.06 48 68.33 52 18.77 18 6.06

3 Low level of

Interest 93 31.96 132 18.33 141 50.90 203 68.35

4 Not relevant 78 26.80 45 0 20 7.22 35 11.78

5 Venue, time not

properly given 0 0.00 5 0 14 5.05 0.00


per schedule 0 0.00 0 0 0 0.00 12 4.04

7 Conducted during

peak season period 20 6.87 0 0 12 4.33 0 0.00

8 Message given are

theoretical 61 20.96 47 0 0 0.00 0 0.00

9 Conducted only for

old and unrelated

technologies 12 4.12 0 0 15 5.42 0 0.00

Total 291 100 291 100 277 100.00 297 100.00

Table 3.50 Continued….

S.No

.

Reasons Exhibitions Tours/field visit Trainings

No. % No. % No. %

1 No time 48 18.05 97 33.45 18 6.04

2 Information not provided

earlier 68 25.56 110 37.93 42 14.09

3 Low level of Interest 122 45.86 45 15.52 144 48.32

4 Not relevant 18 6.77 0 0.00 34 11.41

5 Venue, time not properly

given 10 3.76 15 5.17 28 9.40

6 Did not conduct as scheduled 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

7 Conducted during peak

season period 0 0.00 23 7.93 0 0.00

8 Message given are theoretical 0 0.00 0 0.00 32 10.74

9 Conducted only for old and

unrelated technologies 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00

Total 266 100.00 290 100.00 298 100.00


The primary reason for non participation in the arranged extension activities were

elicited from the sample respondents. In the case of meeting, 32.00% of the farmers were

not interested and 27.00 per cent of the farmers’ opined meetings are not relevant and

theoretical. In case of seminars, 68.00 per cent of the respondents indicated that the

information was not provided. Method demonstration, campaign, trainings and

exhibition evoked very low level of interest among the farmers. The interest levels of the

farmer respondents in this environment were found to be poor and lacking compared to

the other two environments.


n= 75

S.No. Attributes of Satisfaction Fully satisfied Satisfied

No. % No. %

1

Motivation through face to

face contact 14 18.67 35 46.67

2

Orientation towards

Information sources 8 10.67 18 24.00

3 Method of communication 6 8.00 16 21.33

4

Knowledge gained out of

meetings 5 6.67 4 5.33

5

Skills gained out of

demonstrations 16 21.33 7 9.33

6

Messages relevant to

season and time 5 6.67 18 24.00

7

Any Information of new

crops 2 2.67 3 4.00

8

Message given is

compatible 12 16.00 15 20.00

9 Information on market 0 0.00 5 6.67

10

Information on credit

facilities 0 0.00 9 12.00

11

Timeliness of Information

provided 12 16.00 2 2.67

Table 3.51 indicates the levels of satisfaction on the information provided by the

department of agriculture. It could be seen from the table that only 65.00% of the

participating farmers were satisfied through the face to face contact. Also 35 percent of

the farmers had the positive orientation to the information provided. Most of the other

factors of the satisfaction elicited a poor response from the sample farmers.



S.No. Sources

Fully

satisfied Satisfied

Not

Participated/Not

satisfied

No. % No. % No. %

1 Oral communication 12 4.00 18 6.00 270 90.00

2 Demonstration 6 2.00 17 5.67 277 92.33

3 Leaflet 0 0.00 10 3.33 290 96.67

4 Pamphlet 0 0.00 3 1.00 297 99.00

5 Folders 0 0.00 0 0.00 300 100.00

6 Books 0 0.00 0 0.00 300 100.00

7 Radio 16 5.33 24 8.00 260 86.67

8 Television 18 6.00 43 14.33 239 79.67

9 Computer 0 0.00 0 0.00 300 100.00

10 Recent electronic tools 0 0.00 0 0.00 300 100.00

The levels of satisfaction on the different communication sources were elicited

from the farmer respondents. Among the ten sources television, radio, oral

communication, demonstration were found to be most satisfying sources for the sample

respondents. In contrast to the other two environments, the level of satisfaction was found

to be very low in this environment.

Table 3.53 Reasons for Non Satisfaction on Sources of Communication


S.No. Reasons No. %



3 Not provided in time 5 1.67

Total 300 100.00

Only ten per cent of the farmers were exposed to the oral communication. Most of

the exposed farmers opined that the communication does not cover all the crops.



S.No. Reasons No. %


2 Not extended for all the crops 23 7.67

Total 300 100

Only eight per cent of the farmers attended the demonstration and they opined it

could be extended for all the major crops.

3.53.3. Leaflet

S.No. Reasons No. %




Total 300 100.00

Only ten farmers out of the total sample of three hundred received leaflets and

they opined that it is not provided for all the crops.

3.53.4. Pamphlet

S.No. Reasons No. %

1 Not given 297 99.00



Total 300 100

Only one per cent of sample respondents received the pamphlets and they were

not satisfied on the crop coverage.

3.53.5. Folders

S.No. Reasons No. %

1 Not given 300 100.00


Total 300 100.00

None of the sample respondents received any folders.


3.53.6. Radio

S.No. Reasons No. %




Total 260 100.00

About 17.00 per cent of the farmers listened to the radio. Most of them pointed

out that the necessary information is not given and the rest felt that information was more

theoretical.

3.53.7. Television

S.No. Reasons No. %




Total 239 100

Seventeen per cent of the farmer respondents watched television programmes

related to agriculture. A majority of them felt that the timing of the programme is not

convenient and the programmes are theoretical.

The computer and other modern electronic tools were never used by the

department officials in disseminating the information. This was indicated by all the

sample respondents of the dry environment.


n = 75

S.No. Usefullness Yes

No. %

1 Doubts or queries are fully clarified 45 60.00

2

Would you like to adopt the recommended

technologies 25 33.33

3 The technologies are the latest 28 37.33

4 The technologies are need based 24 32.00

5 The technologies are cost effective 20 26.67

6 Clarity in the messages 18 24.00

7 The Information given are profit oriented 15 20.00


Table 3.54 indicates the usefulness of different extension methods in

disseminating the required information to the farmers. Only 60.00 per cent of

participating respondents have indicated that their doubts are fully clarified, 37 per cent

on the technology is latest and about 33 per cent who would adopt the recommended

technologies. Over all, only twenty to thirty three per cent of respondents were satisfied

on the cost effectiveness, profit orientation on the technologies that were recommended.


S.No.

Quality Aspects

Yes No

No. % No. %



3

Quality of plant protection chemicals is

good 65 21.67 235 78.33


Above 25.00 per cent of farmer respondents opined that the quality of fertilizers

was good. Majority of the respondents felt that quality of machinery, seed and plant

protection chemicals were not good.


n = 75

S.No.

Fully satisfied Satisfied

No. % No. %

1

The Extension Officials listen to

your voice 12 16.00 20 26.67

2

Follow up of the

recommendations for sustenance 5 6.67 14 18.67

3

Message is taken for further

research consultation 3 4.00 3 4.00

4

Consultation for refinement of

technology 2 2.67 1 1.33

5

Have you participated in any

technology invention 4 5.33 6 8.00

Feed back was received from the sample respondents on their communication

with the extension officials. Table 3.56 indicates the feed back on communication with

the extension officials. Majority of the farmers were of the opinion that the extension


officials listen to the voice or take up any follow up action. They were not satisfied with

their message taken for further research and refinement of technology.


n = 75


No. % No. %

1


technology adopted 10 13.33 16 21.33

2 Cost effectiveness 8 10.67 12 16.00

3 Exposure to credit institutions 4 5.33 7 9.33

4 Received market information 0 0.00 4 5.33

5

Received Agri business

information 0 0.00 0 0.00

6

Technologies introduced reduce

labour 10 13.33 8 10.67

Table 3.57 indicates the monetary benefits that could accrue to the farmer

respondents on adoption of the recommended technology. About thirty five per cent of

the participating farmers were satisfied with the yield improvement. And twenty six per

cent of the farmers were satisfied with the cost effectiveness. The benefits like exposure

to credit institutions, market information, and business information did not find any kind

of satisfaction among the respondents farmers.


n = 75


No. % No. %

1

Exposure to government

schemes 8 10.67 21 28.00

2 Awareness on crop insurance 8 10.67 16 21.33

3 Eco friendly technologies 8 10.67 18 24.00

4 Social recognition 8 10.67 15 20.00

About one third of farmers have been exposed to the government schemes, crop

insurance scheme and eco friendly technologies. They were also satisfied with the social

recognition that they get for being in touch with the department of agriculture.


A. Problems and constraints faced by the farmers in availing the Agricultural

Extension Services / Reasons for non Satisfaction of Farmers regarding

Public Agricultural Extension Services

Availing agricultural extension service is with the intention to up keep and update newer

and frontier technologies to cope up with the demand of technology driven society. In that

way, public extension plays a crucial and critical role to provide information and

knowledge to the farming community. Perhaps, they are the closest to the farmers to

facilitate accessibility of information. The cumbersome task to encompass the recent

technological development had hampered their progress due to multifarious workloads,

along with the official tasks. On the flipside, there are certain problems and constraints

faced by the farmers and certain amount of dissatisfaction that exists.

Recommendations are not given based on the need assessment of the farmers, was

another constraint faced by the farmers leading to incongruence in messages. Lopsided

tendency of the officials of the department was also said as a constraint, because they

attune to the queries of big and progressive farmers and are uncared about the small

farmers. Subsidy related information was not properly given to the farmers and untimely

supply of seeds and fertilizers was also specified as a constraint by the farmers.

Lacunae Agricultural Extension Service as reported by sample farmers

1. Irregular visits of Assistant Agricultural Officers to farmers’ field

2. Lack of updating of knowledge on agricultural technologies

3. Immediate clarifications to the farmers are not done

4. Inadequacy of information on newer crops

5. Non-provision of market related information.

6. No information on credit sources and other details.

7. Failure to provide information on the various Government schemes and subsidies

8. Insufficient information on the conduct of meetings, seminars etc.

9. Conduct of only few demonstrations, campaigns on new technologies.

10. Low benefit cost ratio due to the adoption of recommended technologies.

11. No need based consultation with farmers by officials

12. Concentration of officials on larger farmers and ignoring small farmers.

13. Untimely supply of inputs like seeds, fertilizers.


Few suggestions were offered by the farmers to regenerate the existing system of the

public extension service, which would not only improve, but also earn credibility and

trust worthiness from the farmers point of view.

Suggestions of the Farmers for refinement the present agricultural extension system

1. Individual contact must be insisted to bring AAOs and farmers together for group

meetings and seminars so that farmers would be able to get the need based

information.

2. Regular meetings and seminars are to be conducted to provide the knowledge

about latest agricultural technologies, newer crops and market information.

3. The information related to marketing, credit institutions and government schemes

must be given to the farmers based on the need on periodical interval.

4. Timely supply of good quality inputs.

5. Modern communication methods should be used for communicating the latest

technologies.

6. Eco friendly technologies should be provided to farmers

In general, it may be concluded that the farmers by and large needed financial

support, bolstered with governmental schemes, good marketing, latest technologies for

their enlistment and empowerment.


B. Feed Back Analysis of the Officials of the Department of Agriculture –

Constraints faced by the Officials of the Department of Agriculture in

Discharging their Duties

Joint Director of Agriculture

1. Uniform season for crops is followed throughout fee state irrespective of varying

cropping pattern existing in the different locations of the state. Due to this, the

seeds and other inputs are dispatched uniformly to all the districts. As the seasons

are different in different districts, such uniformity results in untimely distribution

of inputs to the farmers in most of the districts.

2. Attending to more meetings resulting in table work, affecting the time to be spent

on the extension services. Meeting work consumes more time comparing technical

supervision and attending to farmers.

3. Delay in annual fund allotment affects the further distribution of finance to the

taluks and blocks.

4. Mobility restriction due to non-availability of good vehicles and less allocation of

fuel limits technical and financial monitoring and guidance.

5. A few of the varieties distributed are not competitive compared to the private

company varieties.

6. Capacity building of the extension functionaries is inadequate.

7. Lot of vacancies at different levels affects the target achievement.

8. Insufficient communication facilities.

9. Insufficient funds for publicity and propaganda of different government schemes

10. Participatory approach and bottom up planning which are necessary conditions for

successful governance are missing.

Thus, the aforesaid whole lot of constraints, served as the hindrances for effective

functioning of the JDAs of the district.

Deputy Director of Agriculture

1. The target fixing is not based on real field situation. (eg.) SRI technology is a

labour intensive technology. The technology is recommended to be adopted in a

labour scarce area, it becomes a failure and farmers are not willing to adopt it.

2. They are burdened with more office work, affecting the fieldwork.

3. A single D.D is in charge for many posts.


Assistant Director of Agriculture

1. Many of the ADA posts are vacant and are under in charge of the Junior Officers

resulting in additional responsibilities.

2. Non-fulfillment of vacancies at the levels of AOS and AAOs has resulted in less

field staff strength affecting the achievement of given target.

3. They lack time to conduct training / meeting to farmers due to more office work.

4. Release of fund at the final days of financial year (every time) affects the quality

of the work and has an impact throughout the year leading to inefficiency and

malpractices.

Agriculture Development Officer (ADO)

1. Due to revised job responsibilities, they have to conduct all the extension methods

leading to over loaded work.

2. Late receipt of finance affected the conduct of extension activities and

implementation of schemes.

3. Poor Infrastructure facility leads to inefficiency.

4. Untimely availability of inputs led to untimely distribution.

5. Sustaining vacancy positions have led to overload and inefficient discharge of

duties.

Agricultural Officer

1. Late communication of targets.

2. Belated finalization of tenders for the inputs needed for scheme

3. Belated release of funds

4. Inputs for trials are not received in time

5. The purpose of trial and how it would be carried out is not properly informed in

advance

6. Additional charge for vacant positions have led to inefficiency.

7. Vacancies at lower levels have created malpractices.


AO (PP)

1. For AO (PP) they have to inspect farmers’ seed farm for pest surveillance and

inspection which demands lot of time. This affects his / her technical work. This

lead to over load of work.

2. Inspecting to assess the pest surveillance demands lot of time and affects the

technical work of the agricultural officers, leading to heavy work load.

Assistant Agricultural Officer

1. Distribution of inputs through various schemes affects their work.

2. Inputs are not given on time and they are forced to distribute inputs to the farmers

during non seasons.

3. Due to less field staff strength, they have to physically cover more area. This also

leads to less per farmer coverage.

4. They are not exposed to latest technologies. Due to this, farmers’ preference for

their services is less.

5. Attending more number of meetings in a month affects their field work.

It is to be taken into account that public Agricultural Extension System has to deliver

goods to the farming community with the following specific characteristic features.

i. A majority of the farmers are middle aged and old and the participation of

younger generation in farming is less and coming down.

ii. A major section of the farmers do not attend meetings / seminars / campaigns /

demonstrations and the like in the pretext of lack of time, not interested etc.

iii. Their participation in SHGs / FDGs is very low which reveals the mind set of a

larger section of the farming community.

iv. Their exposure to mass media and willingness to use media for agricultural

technology information is poor


SUGGESTIONS AND STRATEGIES

From the analysis of the data for the three environments of the state and the review of the

literature on the evaluation of agricultural extension system, following are some of the

guidelines and strategies that can be adopted for strengthening the present agricultural

extension system.

1. Developing original, location-specific, participatory and inexpensive extension

methodologies and materials instead of applying those methodologies, which are

promoted as universally suitable

To make efforts for universal application of any single extension methodology is

neither logical nor technically sound. One fact, established through field observations and

experience over so many years in many countries, is that no single extension

methodology, no matter how successful it proved to be in certain situation, could be

suitable for all situations. The situation comprises people, and their characteristics,

farming patterns, geographical terrain, climate, population density, type and diversity of

extension service providers, political environment, institutions, infrastructure, local

customs, and possibly some other factors, which must be taken into consideration while

developing an appropriate extension methodology.

The Training and Visit (T & V) system of extension, which was introduced by the

World Bank in 1970s and dominated extension work for over two decades, was also a

top-down extension model, which later came under criticism on several grounds. Another

major, popular methodology has been the Farmer Field School (FFS), which became best

practice for this purpose. The FFS was favored over the T & V system due to its emphasis

on learners’ participation. Basically, both of these extension methodologies were not

really developed locally.

Presently, T & V system is out of favour and governments have either dropped it

altogether or have modified it to the extent that only some resemblance has been left to

the original model. The FFS method is still expanding although it has been subject of

criticism on various grounds. It is feared that although the FFS is a good methodology for

educating farmers in IPM like technical subjects, the forceful push for its universal

application as an extension methodology for all technical subjects and geographical

regions, just as was done in case of the T & V system, may eventually end up with the


same fate as the T & V model. There is indeed a strong case for developing location-

specific extension methodologies.

Formation of a small team of field-level experienced extension staff for

developing original, situation-specific extension methodologies.

Through active consultations with the local farmers, identification of various

traditional and contemporary low-cost non-formal educational methods.

Keeping in view the situational factors of each location (people and their

characteristics, farming patterns, geographical terrain, climate, population density,

type and diversity of extension service providers, political environment,

institutions, infrastructure, local culture and customs) bottom-up programme

planning could be developed.

Preparation of relevant audio-visual materials, which could enhance learning

Field-testing of each extension methodology and relevant training audio-visual

materials, involving farmers of various agricultural interest categories at different

locations Determination of simple, culture-based patterns for organizing various

categories of farmers into groups at different specific locations for learning

purposes through application of most applicable location-specific extension

methodologies

Preparation of a manual on various original location-specific extension

methodologies, including the audio-visual materials, for various categories of

farmers, for use by the extension workers in different locations

Preparation of a training plan and implementation schedule for the training of

extension workers in using extension methodologies in real-life situations and

adapting the methodologies to the specific prevailing situation

2. Encouraging bottom-up, grassroots extension programme planning by farmers and

extension workers at revenue village / block level in order to make extension demand-

driven.

Farmers need to be encouraged to form groups and prepare demand based

extension services plans with the assistance of concerned extension workers. These

services may be provided in their entirety by public extension services, or by a mixture of

public and private institutions.


Training of extension workers for playing the role of facilitator in helping

farmers’ groups in preparing extension programme plans, with the support on

complex technical issues drawn from subject-matter specialists

Training of rural community leaders in bottom-up grassroots planning

Merger of several groups’ demand-for-service plans into village plans, and merger

of several villages’ plans into cluster demand

Integration of clusters in to block and district plans.

Delivery of the services by government line departments based on the demand for

services plans

Monitoring of the timeliness and quality of the delivery of services, and impact

assessment jointly by farmers’ groups and extension workers with the assistance

of subject-matter specialists

Guidelines for modernizing national extension systems

3. Follow appropriate strategies for getting maximum output from the limited staff

strength

The structural adjustment programmes have caused severe downsizing of the

human resources in the public extension department. It is not possible to have just one

single formula for calculating an ideal number of extension staff as it will differ from

place to place depending on many other factors. The old concept of covering a certain

number of farm families by each extension agent should now be changed a taking into

account the information technology revolution for contacting farmers and other

institutions.

Each of the following approaches or a combination of them will help in

overcoming the staff shortage in delivering extension services.

1. Filling up vacancies at all levels in the Agriculture Department especially at the

levels of Assistant Agricultural Officer and Agricultural Officers with qualified

candidates prescribed for the positions.

2. Making use of information technology tools and media with adequate human

backstopping

3. Identifying progressive farmers and those who could work as facilitators in

extension activities along with extension staff.

4. Following group extension approach to eliminate individual farmer contact as far

as possible.


MODERNIZING NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SYSTEMS

4. Ensure effective operational linkages between extension and research and other key

relevant institutions

Extension is a service devised for the benefit of farmers, with a traditional mandate of

transfer of improved agricultural technology. The most important operational linkage that

has been emphasized for extension since its formal introduction is with research. This

linkage is indeed important in view of the fact that agricultural research institutes are the

main source of technology for extension organizations.

The Training and Visit model of extension, was the pattern of compulsory

meetings between researchers and extension workers that took place just before the start

of main cropping seasons. The purpose of the meetings was to discuss the expected field

problems, identification of key messages to be passed on to “contact farmers” by the field

extension agents, and other issues related to the approaching cropping season. This

modality was found to be useful, providing a productive platform for the specialists from

research and extension to discuss farmers’ concerns and problems. However, like the

Training and Visit model, these meetings, although useful, also did not prove to be

sustainable and died down with the end of particular projects.

Efforts to bring research and extension closer have started taking advantage of advances

in information and communication technology and virtual linkages are being established

between relevant institutions.

Initiating a process at field level for drawing research agenda through consultation

among researchers, extension workers and farmers with the objective of making

the agenda field oriented.

Making use of modern information and communication technology, establish

virtual interactive linkages among research and extension institutes.

5. Encouraging the extension services to empower farmers through organizing them

into legal associations to constitute a strong lobby for themselves and for extension

activities

The trend to transform farming into agri-business or a commercial enterprise is

visible throughout the world. The continuation of subsistence farming is being questioned

on economic grounds. In many developing countries, farming has been left to old people


because the new generation does not see much future in this profession. Other global

developments, such as mentioned earlier in this paper, are also hinting that the farmers

cannot depend just on farm income but must diversify their income-generation habits.

There is no doubt that the farmers, if operating individually rather than collectively, will

never be able to run their small farms as agri-business or commercial enterprise nor will

they be able to create a strong lobby for themselves for safeguarding their interests. They

must organize themselves initially in small, informal groups then gradually in special

interest groups and then into larger groups, which should be registered with the

government as legal entities.

A strong lobby of farmers will not only work for farmers’ rights but also for demanding

effective agricultural extension services from the government, thus ascertaining more

budget and staff needs for the extension services. Farmers’ grouping will also facilitate

the application of participatory extension approaches.

Providing refresher-training courses to extension workers in organizing special-

interest groups of men and women farmers.

Directing extension services to organize farmers in groups and associations and

have them registered with the government.

Provide training to farmers’ associations so that they could possess necessary

knowledge and skills for exercising their influence in requesting specific services

(such as extension advice from public and private institutions and assessing their

quality when delivered, credit, farm inputs, marketing matters, etc.) as well as for

converting their farms into agri-business and commercial enterprise.

Farmers’ Groups / Associations as done in Tamil Nadu Precision Farming Project

may be followed.

Guidelines for modernizing national extension systems

6. Promote participation in extension by involving public, private and other institutions

In early days when agricultural extension was introduced, there was hardly any

private company or meaningful non-public institution that was keen to engage in

delivering extension services. The situation has changed now, and one finds several

public and non-public actors, which are actively engaged in extension or extension-like

activities. These actors are eager to join any formal mechanism or project through which

they can make development contributions, sometimes on voluntary basis and sometimes

at a fee. Today, this is not only the government agricultural extension field worker who


meets farmers to give advice, but salesmen from various commercial companies dealing

in farm inputs who not only sell their products but also give advice on their use. Then,

there could be several field workers belonging to NGOs, who are involved in extension

type activities in rural areas. Some researchers who conduct research outreach activities,

such as on-farm trials, also engage farmers in conversations during which quite a bit of

extension advice is delivered. The same is true for university faculty and students, who

come in contact with farmers for data collection purposes. Thus many countries are

enjoying a pluralistic pattern of extension, but in a sporadic manner. Most of the time,

there is no well-organized system that makes possible the active collaboration of

stakeholders in both planning and implementation of extension programmes.

A well-structured, pluralistic mechanism of extension planning and delivery will

alleviate much of the personnel and financial pressure on the government. In addition, the

farmers could benefit from a variety of human information sources, that is, in addition to

the media. However, a clearly defined role of government is needed, which could

comprise policy guidance, coordination, quality control, technical support to weak private

organizations and NGOs, and settlement of disputes, in order to safeguard the interests of

farmers.

Preparation of a list of the public and non-public institutions and organizations

(other than government agricultural extension department) such as private

companies, NGOs, farmers’ associations, rural organizations, agricultural

institutions, agricultural research institutes and stations, etc., in every district,

which are delivering or are interested in delivering agricultural extension advice to

farmers.

Assessment of extension and training needs of farmers in various districts and

decision whether the existing government agricultural extension service is able to

meet those needs. If not, the option of “outsourcing” be considered under which

funding of extension and delivery of extension are considered as separate

functions, and as such contracts for delivering specific extension services are

given by the government to the relevant public and non-public institutions, other

than the government extension department.

Preparation of documents for outsourcing and public-private partnership, and

training of the district extension staff in outsourcing the extension work to other


institutions, forging public-private partnerships, and in monitoring the quality of

the work done

Periodic review and updating of the list of public and private providers of

extension services

Arrangements by the government to play its role effectively in in order to

safeguard the interests of farmers, including responsibilities such as provision of

policy guidance, ensuring coordination and quality control, provision of technical

support to weak private organizations and NGOs, and settlement of disputes.

7. Broaden the technical mandate of extension

Extension is basically non-formal education that targets rural adults outside the

formal school system with the aim of helping them improve the quality of their lives by

gaining useful knowledge and skills. Agricultural extension focuses on the non-formal

education of rural adults, in particular farmers, in improved agricultural know-how and

skills for increasing farm production.

At present public agricultural extension system deals with transfer of technology

only where as market information, information on credit etc are to be given to farmers

through the extension workers.

Preparation of the existing extension staff for non-formal education of farmers in

marketing extension and credit related information.

Short-term training of extension staff on the above lines is essential.

8. Develop and apply information technology tools to facilitate the work of extension

workers

As organizations benefit from the development of various kinds of technologies,

extension organization could also benefit from the information technology advances. The

extension offices could use Internet, e-mail and various advanced audio-visual equipment

in their daily work. In the field, however, the benefit will be limited. The information and

communication technology should be used for developing necessary tools that could be

used by extension workers.

It is difficult to prescribe any specific application of information because

conditions differ from place to place. However, the following could be suggested

in a generic way, which may be adapted to particular situations.


As a rule of thumb, the efforts to apply information technology should be started

at locations, which have necessary infrastructure and pre-requisites.

A study to be conducted by a team comprising two specialists, one in electronic

communication technology and the other in extension and training, in order to

identify specific activities in extension work where modern information and

communication technology may be realistically applied and to identify the

extension work related locations which have necessary infrastructure for

installation and use of electronic technology tools.

Interactive electronic linkages may be established between extension and relevant

institutions. ODERNIZING NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SYS

Extension data bases may be created, containing information on last few years’

prices of various commodities and projections for the near future, records of

climate for the last few years and any expected unusual weather conditions in the

near future, proven useful agricultural technologies, contact mailing and e-mail

addresses and telephone numbers of subject-matter specialists and agricultural

produce buyers, demand for grains and vegetables, etc. The extension workers in

their work may use this database.

A variety of attractive extension and training materials may be prepared with the

help of computer, using creative techniques.

9. Following a proper and motivational human resource management policy in the

Agricultural Department is a pre requisite for agricultural development in the state.

This policy should ensure the following.

Proper and timely promotion of staff right from the level of Agricultural Officers.

Specification of work load norms properly for different positions in different

regions of the state.

Doing away with the culture of additional charge / in charge for different

positions.

Training the staff on not satisfying the superior only but on satisfying the mandate

and needs of the farming community.


10. Ensuring release of funds and opening purchase tenders in proper seasons / time

The coverage of targets could be done in the correct season in the real sense

avoiding malpractices.

Extension worker could avoid searching farmers to distribute different inputs at

the end of the season / non season.


References

1. Jessica Dart, R John Petheram, Warren Straw. (2006). Review of Evaluation in

Agricultural Extension, Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation

Human Capital, Communications & Information Systems, Research and

Development, Institute of Land and Food Resources, Australia.

2. Kalim Qamar, M (2005). Modernizing National Agricultural Extension systems:

A Practical Guide for Policy- Makers of Developing countries, Sustainable

Development Department, Food and Agriculture Organization of The United

Nations, Rome

3. Kumar, P(1998) Food Demand and Supply Projections for India, Agricultural

Economics, Policy Paper 98-01, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New

Delhi

4. Larry s. Daley (1999) A preliminary evaluation of the needs for agricultural

extension in a free Cuba, Cuba in Transition · ASCE

5. Madhur Gautam, (2000), Agricultural Extension - The Kenya Experience: An

Impact Evaluation, The World Bank, Washington, D.C.

6. Ramesh Chand,(1999) Emerging trends and Regional Variations in Agricultural

Investments and their implc0ations for Growth and Equity. Draft Project Report,

NCAP. New Delhi.

7. Rasheed Sulaiman V, Van den Ban, A.W. (2000). Agricultural Extension In India

- The Next Step, Policy Brief No.9, National Centre for Agricultural Economics

and Policy Research, New Delhi

8. Samanta, R.K.and S.K.Arora(eds) Management of Agricultural Extension in

Global Perspective, BRPC, India Ltd, Delhi ).

9. Selvarajan S and Joshi P.K (2000) Socio-economic Policies in Natural Resource

Management, Souvenir, International Conference on Managing Natural Resource

for Sustainable Agricultural Production in the 21st Century, New Delhi.)

10. Agricultural Extension - The Kenya Experience (1999), Precis - World Bank

Operations Evaluation Report, No.198.


ANNEXURE I

List of Blocks and Villages Selected for Data Collection

I. Irrigated Environment

Thanjavur

S.No. Name of the blocks Villages

1. Thiruvaiyaru Vellamparampur

2. Ammapattai Poodi

3. Orathanadu Kannathaalkudi

4. Thirupananthal Chindamparandhapuram

Crops mainly grown: Paddy, Pulses, Green gram, Black gram, Gingelly, Sugarcane,

Maize, Groundnut, Suyabean, Red Gram, Cotton, Banana

Trichy


1. Musiri Maruthur

2. Lalgudi Thalakudi

3. Andanallur Vyalur

4. Mannachanallur Korathakudi

Crops mainly grown: Paddy, Millets, Pulses, Sugarcane, Ground nut, Gingelly, Sunflower

and Castor.

Cuddalore district


1. Kattumannarkudi Keelkadambur

2. Komarachi Thirunaraiyur

3. Vriddhachalam Puthikaraipettai

4. Kammapuram Kammapuram

Crops mainly grown: Rice, Millets and other cereals, pulses, sugarcane, gingelly,

groundnut, cotton BL, Tapioca, Pulses others cashew, jack, coconut.


Thiruvarur


1. Valangaiman ` Thozhuvur

2. Mannarkudi Vadapathy

3. Thiruvaroor Naranamangalam

4. Kodavasal Agaraogai

Crops mainly grown: Rice, Pulses, Sugarcane, Groundnut, Gingelly, Cotton.

Tirunelveli


1. Kuruvikulam Kuruvikulam

2. Vasuthevanallur Puliangudi

3. Sankarankoil Perumathur

4. Melaneelethanallur Vanniaconethal

Crops mainly grown: Paddy, cholam, cumbu, ragi, maize, mother millet, black gram,

green gram, cow pea, groundnut, sunflower, gingelly, coconut, fibre cotton, sugarcane,

chillies.

II. Irrigated Dry Environment

Coimbatore


1. Annur Pogalur

2. S S Kulam Athipalayam

3. Pongalur Vellanatham

4. Thondamuthur Pooluvampatti

Crops mainly grown: Paddy, Jowar, Sugarcane, Cotton, Groundnut, Maize, Turmeric,

Onion, Chillies, Vegetables, Banana, Coconut, Arecanut.


Villupuram district


1. Gingee Uranithangal

2. Vallam Vadavanur

3. Kolianur Ramayampalayam

4. Melmalaiyanur Melacherry

Crops mainly grown: Paddy, Cholam, Ragi, Cumbu, Redgram, Black gram, Horsegram,

Varagu, Sugarcane, Groundnut, Cotton, Casuarvia, Coconut

Erode


1. Bhavanisagar P.Puliyampatti

2. Sathyamanagalam Kenchanur

3. Perunthurai Thudupathi

4. Gobichettipalayam Siruvallur

Crops mainly grown: Paddy, Jowar, Pulses, Turmeric, Chillies, Groundnut, Cotton,

Sugarcane, Tobacco.

Salem


1. Veerapandi Marulayampalayam

2. Panamarathupatti Mallur

3. Peddanaickenpalayam Puthirakoundanpalayam

4. Mecheri Panapuram

Crops mainly grown: Cumbu, Ragi, Paddy, Cholam, Redgram, Blackgram, Greengram,

Horsegrm, Turmeric, Sugarcane, Banana, Gingelly,Tapioca, Cotton, Castor.


Thiruvallur


1. Thiruvallur Ekkadu

2. Poonamalle Nemam

3. Thiruthani T.Pudur

4. Thiruvalaugadu Panapakkam

Crops mainly grown: Paddy, sugarcane, groundnut, cumbu

III. Dry Environment

Sivagangai


1. Tiruppathur Kandavaranpatti

2. Kallal Kumachipatti

3. Ilaiyankudi Kandamangalam

4. Kalayarkoil Paganeri

Crops mainly grown: Paddy, Gingelly, Sugarcane, Groundnut, Ragi.

Perambalur


1. Ariyalur Vilangudi

2. Thirumanur Varanarasi

3. Sendurai Nakkampadi

4. Andimadam Elaiyur

Crops mainly grown: Paddy, Groundnut, Gingelly, Cotton, Cashew, Sugarcane, Pulses.


Dharmapuri


1. Pennagaram Papparapatti

2. Nallamballi Manithahalli

3. Palacode Karagathahalli

4. Morappur Gopinathampatti

Crops mainly grown: Paddy, Millets (Ragi), other minor millets, Pulses, Sugarcane,

Mango, Tamarind, Coconut

Tuticorin district


1. Kovilpatti Kumaragiri

2. Puthur Sankaralingapuram

3. Vilathikulam Pillayarnatham

4. Kayathar Kalugumalai

Crops mainly grown: Paddy, Cholam, Cumbu, Kudivaivalli, Cotton, Groundnut, Banana,

Vegetables, Palm.

Viruthunagar district


1. Sattur Mettamalai

2. Koviapatti Aariyur

3. Aruppukottai Kanchanayakaapatti

4. Virudhunagar Chenalgudi

Crops mainly grown: Cotton, Pulses, Oil Seeds, Millets, Paddy, Sugarcane, Lab Lab,

Cholam, Cumbu, Ragi, Chilli, Sunflower.


ANNEXURE II

Over all Rating of the Farmers on the Functioning of the Agricultural Extension

System

Relationship with officials

Relationship Aspect Scale

Maintaining cordial relationship 1.67

Awareness level increased 1.47

Strengthened contact 1.60

Communication/Information

Communication Aspects Scale

Motivation through face to face contact 1.63

Orientation towards Information sources 1.60

Method of communication 1.53

Knowledge gained out of meetings 1.40

Skills gained out of demonstrations 1.33

Messages relevant to season and time 1.20

Any Information of new crops 1.27

Message given is compatible 1.20

Information on market 1.00

Information on credit facilities 1.20

Timeliness of Information provided 1.13


Efficiency – Participation Level

Participation Level of Participation

Meetings attended 8.25%

Method Demonstrations Attended 10.55%

Campaigns Attended 6.53%

Exhibitions Attended 15.00%

Tours/Field Visits Attended 4.25%

Trainings Attended 3.00%

Effectiveness- Mode of communication

Mode of Communication Scale

Oral communication 2.15

Demonstration 1.67

Leaflet 1.07

Pamphlet 1.07

Folders 1.00

Radio 1.67

Television 1.07

Computer 1.00

Recent electronic tools 1.00


Effectiveness – Result Perception

Perception factors Score

Doubts or queries are fully clarified 1.53

Likeliness to adopt the recommended practices 1.40

The technologies are the latest 1.47

The technologies are need based 1.40

The technologies are cost effective 1.33

Clarity in the messages 1.33

The Information given are profit oriented 1.33

Usefulness of the Extension System

Usefulness Score

Have the yield improved out of the technology adopted 1.53

Cost effective 1.40

Have you been exposed to credit institutions 1.20

Market information provided 1.00

Agri business promotion 1.00

Reduces use of labour 1.40


Usefulness of the Extension System

Usefulness Score

Were you exposed to government schemes 1.53

Have you been made aware of crop insurance 1.13

Eco friendly technologies 1.27

Social recognition 1.53

an appraisal of extant public agricultural extension

Documents