\

 

AN EMPLEMENTATION MODEL
FOR
AGRECULTURAL INNOVATiONS

Thesis for the Degree of M. S.

MICHIGAN STATE uuwmsm
GEORGE mum RAMSAY
1970

IHESII

 

   
      

  

g magma av ‘3
HMS 8: SUNS'
500K BINBERV INC.

993.“!!! .5919???

  

. 'l
.11; i
W8

 

Ill/I/ll/II/ll/II/III/lllllllflllllIIII/IU/l/lll/l/lllllllW

3 1293 10413 2521

AN IMPLEMENTATION MODEL
FOR
AGRICULTURAL INNOVATIONS

BY

George William Ramsay

A Graduate Study

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

Master of Science

Institute for Extension Personnel Development

1970

Copyright, George William Ramsay, 1970

All rights reserved. No part of this document may be
reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means,

electronic or mechanical, including photocopying. re-
cording or by any information storage and retrieval

system. without permission in writing from the author.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author is indebted to Dr. Mason Miller, who served
as chairman of the guidance committee. Mr. Edwin Amend is
extended a special thanks for his assistance and encourage-
ment throughout the author's masters program. Acknowledgment
is also due the other members of the guidance committee.
.Appreciation is expressed to Dr. Irving Wyeth and Dr. Nicholas
Luyrx for their direction and advice.

Appreciation is extended to my colleagues in USAID and
friends abroad who helped me gain an insight into the imple-

mentation process.

iii

Chapter
I
II

III

IV

VI

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction

Presentation of the Implementation Model
Overview of the Implementation Process
Other Studies
Development of the Basic Model
The Implementation Model in Action

Research
International Research
Governmental Research
Regional Research
Local Research
Private Research
Communicating Research Findings
Functional Model For Research

Policy Formulation - Agricultura1.Deve10p-
ment

Economic Analysis of the Innovation
Feasibility Study of the Proposal
Consequences of Implementation
Incentives for Adeption
Institutionalization of the Plan
Supervisory Personnel and Their Function

Supply of Inputs
Supply of Seeds
Supply of Fertilizer
Supply of Insecticides
Supply of Machinery
Distribution of Inputs
Credit for Purchase of Inputs
Transportation.Availability
Functional Model for Agricultural Inputs

Change.Agents and Their Function
Professional Change Agents
The Extension Agent
School Teachers
Politicians as Change.Agents
Communications in a Campaign.Approach
Volunteer Communicators
The Effect of Cultural Patterns

iv

75

VII

VIII

IX

Production Factors Leading to Adoption
The Farm Family
The Land Situation
Prevailing Level of Knowledge
Influence of Incentives for Adoption
Social Pressures on the Adopters
Difficulty of Methodology
Investment Requirements
The Adaption Process

Marketing — Purchase and Distribution
The Buying System
Quality Control Standards
Price Fixing System
Distribution and Handling

Disposition of the Commodity
Local Consumption
Regional and National Consumption
International Export of the Commodity
Conclusion

Bibliography

100
101
103
105

100

Figure

CDV O\U\ 5U N

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Research Linkages Within and Outside of
Research

Planning Linkages

Linkages of Input Suppliers
Change Agent Linkages

Linkages of the Production Phase
Marketing Linkages

Consumer Linkages

Basic Implementation Model for Agricultural
Innovations

An Implementation Model for Agricultural
Innovations

vi

12
1h
15
16
18

19
21

23

27

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

All agricultural advisers are development planners.
Every planner should understand not only his phase of the
work, but how it relates to each of the other phases of
implementing an agricultural innovation. Advisers who
understand the complete process of implementation can
offer considerable assistance to their host country
colleagues and help avoid many pitfalls in the future.

This paper is written to present an over-view of a
coordinated implementation process for agricultural innov-
ations. The implementation of an agricultural innovation
is a dynamic and complex process. A model is used in an
attempt to present this complex process in a clear and
concise manner. This is a macro-approach to the study
of the linkages and channels of information flowing
throughout the implementation process.

No attempt has been made to touch on all aspects
of this complex process. It is hoped that the reader
will gain further insight into the implementation process
and the paper will stimulate further innovative thought
on the subject. Many of the ideas expressed in this

paper are an outgrowth of the author's 14 years overseas

as an agricultural extension adviser for the U.S. Agency
for International DeveIOpment.

At the close of the Second World War, the idea of
foreign aid as a part of the United States foreign policy
was established under the Marshall Plan. This gave birth
to the phiIOSOphy thatapeaceful world is me where all
nations share in the enjoyment of the fruits of develop-
ment. The Marshall Plan was principally one of economic
aid to the war-devastated countries of EurOpe. Technical
knowledge was not in short supply ianurope. It was not
until the United States began to assist some of the less-
deveIOped countries that technical assistance was
included in the foreign aid.

The establishment of the "Point Four" program gave
emphasis to the value of technical assistance. "Point
Four", under President Truman, was designed to transfer
technical knowledge to the less-developed countries of
the world in an effort to accelerate development. Most
of the countries in the underdeveIOped part of the world
were primarily agricultural. Therefore, the major thrust
in technical assistance was the transfer of agricultural
innovations.

To facilitate the utilization of the agricultural
innovations, much of the effort was spent in general
education, health and institution building. Agricultural

technicians eXperimented with application of American

agricultural innovations to the less-developed countries
with very little large-scale success. The technological
spread in agriculture between the United States and the
less-develOped countries was just too great for large-
scale adaption of U.S. innovations.

It was soon learned that drastic methodological
alterations must be made before these innovations would
be useful in the less-advantaged parts of the world. A
concerted effort was made by the U.S. agricultural tech-
nicians overseas, during the days of the International
COOperation Administration, to make the necessary alterations
in U.S. agricultural innovations for utilization in aid-
receiving countries. This effort culminated in the
dramatic breakthrough now called the ”Green Revolution.”

As a result of the ”Green Revolution,” the world-
wide development focus is now placed on agriculture.
Development priorities in the less-developed countries
have shifted almost exclusively to agriculture and industry
related to agriculture. The threat of an impending
population explosion was beginning to have real meaning
until the breakthrough in wheat and rice production in
Asia took place. The world heaved a sigh of relief and
the feeling of despair changed to hepe for the future.
Many feel, however, that this breakthrough will only
allow us to take a quick breath before the population
problem hits us with its full explosion.

The technological breakthrough causing the dramatic
change in production was the discovery of new fertilizer
responsive varieties of wheat and rice. Farmer response
to these new innovations was so rapid it caught the world
be surprise. The implications of the ”Green Revolution"
were not appreciated until recently. The prevailing
question now is whether the ”Green.Revolution" is
causing more problems than it solves. Wharton (20. P. 476)
in the article ”Cornucopia or Pandora's Box?" states it
this way: "The quiet, passive peasant is already aware
of the modern world-far more than we realize- and he is
impatient to gain his share."

Thus far in the "Green Revolution" there have been
many signs of incomplete implementation planning. The
emphasis appears to have been concentrated on the supply
of agricultural inputs and encouraging the farmer to
grow the new wheat and rice. Evidently little concern
was shown for the consequences of over-production or
emphasizing the average farmer's involvement. The
marketing problem, consumer preference. transPortation
availability. continuing research. institutional inade-
quacies and credit availability have emerged as "second
generation“ problems.

Many of these problems exist today because the devel-
Opment planners, both foreign and host country nationals,

did not visualize the complete implementation picture.

Evidently much of the planning was done one section at

a time without prOper cross-communication.

CHAPTER 2
PRESENTATION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION MODEL

Over-view of the Implementation Process

Many peOple consider the implementation of an agri-

cniltural innovation as merely convincing the farmer to

auiopt the innovation. The implementation process is far

there involved and complex a process. To gain a clear

jperspective of the complete process, one must start
at the source of the innovation (research) and follow the

complete process through to the consumer of the agricul-

tural product.

The complete implementation process can be broken

down into seven major phases. The sequential order of

implementation of these phases is: (1) source, normally

through research; (2) olic formulation, both the planning

and the supervision; (3) inputs used for the innovation;

(4) c unicators. both professional and volunteer change

agents working with the farmer: (5) the adoption phase,

use of the innovation: (6) marketi , all the ramifications

of purchasing the product, distribution and handling. and
(7’) dispgsition of the commodity to the ultimate consumer.

In actual practice. the implementation of an agricul-

1“liral innovation does not always follow this exact sequence

of phases but instead jumps back and forth between phases
a great deal. For purpose of analysis, however, we will
consider the implemmtation process in its most common
sequence as outlined above.

An over-all understanding of the complete implemen-
tation process will help an American agricultural adviser
'to gain a better perspective of his job assignment. {He
‘wiJJ.see more clearly the interrelationships between his
job responsibilities and that of his American colleagues.
lie can also help his host country colleagues to appreciate

the importance of their role in the implementation process.

Other Studies

Most studies relating to adoption of agricultural
innovations are either studies of the adoption process
at a micro level (the individual farmer) or studies related
to agricultural development in general. There appears to be
a definite void in studies relating themselves directly
to the implementation process for agricultural innovations.
It seems inconsistent that the vehicle that is the driving
force behind general agricultural development has received
80 little attention. Many authors deal with segments of
the implementation process but few, if any, deal with
el'l'tirety. One possible reason for this situation may be

t3he high degree of specialization present in our higher-

education system.

Dr. A.T. Mosher, in his book, Getting Agriculture
Movin , (8, Pp. 63 & 123) has identified five "essentials"
and five ”accelerators" which he considers universal for
agricultural develOpment. The five essentials are
(1) markets for farm products, (2) constantly changing
technology, (3) local availability for supplies and
equipment, (4) production incentives for farmers, and
(5) transportation. These essentials all are of equal
importance in that they are all interrelated and any one
can be crucial for any given situation. Given
the five essentials, the five accelerators (while not
absolutely required) that will speed agricultural
development are (1) education for deveIOpment, (2) production
credit, (3) group action by farmers, (4) improving and
expanding agricultural land. and (5) national planning.

Dr. Mosher's approach is one for general agricul-
tural develOpment. but the reader will note the similarity
between the essentials and accelerators and the phases
listed for the implementation process. The only notable
difference lies in the degree of importance attributed to
some of the accelerators listed. When considering imple-
mentation of an innovation. national planning and produc-
tion credit are both important accelerators while the
other three accelerators listed would be considered "givens."

Insight into the manipulation of economic variables

and the recognition of the peasant farmer as a victim of

economic suppression has helped in conceptualizing the
implementation model. Dr. T.W. Schultz. University of
Chicago, (16) believes that the crucial feature in trad-
itional agriculture is the low rate of return to investment
in agricultural factors. To transform this type of agri‘
culture, Schultz believes a more profitable set of factors
must be develOped and supplied (which is a matter of invest-
ment - investment in both human and material capital). He
also points out (16, Pp. 130-44) that the real factors of
production are concealed under "technological change" and
that the analysis of the vital factors causing change has
been passed over repeatedly because of the general treatment
of the economic factor "technological change."

The coordination required in agricultural development
planning is emphasized by Mellor (7, P. 379). He states,
"The purpose of planning for development is to achieve
greater efficiency through coordination. Effective coor-
dination is based on an over-all view of the development
process." With regard to planning, Gunnar Myrdal (9. P. 726-34)
speaks not only of the forces exerted from abroad for
development planning. but also of the counterforces at work.
Social and political counterforces often prevent an other-
wise excellent plan from being implemented. The activity
of the counterforce is usually an outgrowth of misinfor-

mation or opposition to the group supporting the plan.

10

Lester R. Brown, in his excellent book on the
”Green Revolution” called Seeds of Change (2, P. 77% has
very effectively described the need for understanding the
entire implementation process through his description of
the multitude of "second generation" problems evolving
from the rapid increases in rice and wheat production.
The Pearson Report (10, P. 61) also refers to the array of
new problems emerging as a result of the ”Green Revolution."

Dr. Clifton Wharton. Jr. in his “Strategies for
Rural DevelOpment” (19, Pp. 1 and 2) states this propo-
sition: "In the early stages of agricultural develOpment
many aspects of agricultural production and distribution
cannot be centrally planned or directed. Some centralized
actions are effective, but most are not." He continues:
"Agricultural development programs must be based upon an
analysis of the developmental process in its complex
totality concentrating upon key factors, each of which
must be studied in all the uniqueness of each particular
situation."

This paper is an attempt to do what Dr. Wharton
suggests in his last statement, drawing together infor-
mation from the studies cited above plus several others and

the author's past experiences.

11

Development of the Basic Model

 

The implementation process for an agricultural.
innovation has been described as a complex and dynamic
process. In order to analyze implementation, we will
freeze the process and look at each of the components
individually and collectively to gain a better insight
as to its functions. First, we shall look at the linkages
and information channels forming the constellation around
each phase of the basic model. Then we will join the
phases, unfreeze the model and observe it in action.

Source or research phase. The identity of the
source or research phase includes (1) international
research concerning the innovation, (2) governmental
research conducted at a national level, (3) research
conducted at research stations in the various regions
of the country, (4) local research conducted by farmers
in c00peration with or independent of regional research
stations, and (5) private research conducted by private
industry in connection with their agricultural product.
In the formulation of an agricultural innovation. the
government research people at the national level gather
research information from all other research sources and
evaluate the findings.

Within the research phase a constellation of link-
ages and information channels is established from the

national research to all other research institutions. In

12

addition, a second constellation of linkages is estab-
lished by national research to each of the other implemen-
tation phases to eXpedite the research function required

by each of the other phases. Details of these functions
will be found in Chapter Three. For a clearer picture of
the research phase and its double constellation of linkages

please refer to the paradigm in Figure 1.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Communicators] Inputs
[InternationaI] [REgional]
Planning & National 5{Production]
Supervision Research
[Privategj Local
[Marketing] [Consumer]

 

 

Figure 1. Research Linkages Within and Outside of Research

13

Policy formulation. Planning and supervision are
both included in the policy formulation phase. The devel-
opment planning for implementation of the agricultural
innovation is primarily one of collection and evaluation
of information and plans submitted from other phases of
the model. Evaluation then continues with an economic
analysis of the innovation and a feasibility study.
Planners then study the consequences of implementation and
the incentives for adaption. followed by preparation of the
plan and its institutionalization. Planners, officials
of the several ministries involved and agricultural
educators function as supervisory personnel. Further expla-
nation of development planning and supervision will be
found in Chapter Four.

The linkages and flow of information to the planners
are vital to the successful implementation of an innovation.
At all times throughout the implementation process. the
plan should be under revision. This requires the continu-
ation of the linkages and flow of static-free information
throughout the life of the implementation process. Please
refer to the paradigm in Figure 2 for a picture of these
linkages.

Sgpply of Inpgg Mategials. The materials used as
inputs for this phase of the model are those used in crop
production: however, the model can easily be adapted to

livestock, poultry or horticultural innovations with only

14

 

[Consumer

     

 

 

 

 

Research Planning Sommunicators

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Marketing Production]

 

 

Figure 2. Planning Linkages

the apprOpriate input substitutions. Included in the
input phase are the seeds, fertilizer, insecticides,
and machinery as the input materials. In addition, the
transportation, distribution, sales and credit for the
inputs are also a part of the input phase. Further
eXplanation of the input functions will be found in
Chapter Five.

Determination of information regarding types and

quality, predicted quantity, location of selling points,

15

incentives for manufacturing and credit availability for

the desired inputs makes the establishment of linkages

with other phases of the model mandatory. Input insti-
tutions are mostly in the private sector and often link-
ages between the private sector and government are difficult
to establish. This does not reduce their necessity,
however. These linkages and static-free information
channels, as shown in Figure 3, should be established in

all phases of the model except the consumer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LResearch] Lghange Agents]
Input
Planners Suppliers Producers
Marketing]

 

 

Figure 3. Linkages of Input Suppliers

Chgngg.Agents. Both formal change agents and

volunteer communicators are included in this phase of
implementation. Formal change agents are professionals
such as extension.workers. school teachers, and politicians.

The volunteer communicators are such people as community

16

leaders. trader, migrant laborers and herdsmen, truck

and bus drivers and absentee family members. The effect
of cultural patterns on the adoption of innovations is
also handled in the change agent phase of the model. The
above change agents and their functions in implementing
an innovation are explained in Chapter Six.

By far the strongest linkage of the change agents is
with their clientele - the farmer. However. linkages with
all other phases of the model are required in order to
give advice to the farmer in the most satisfactory manner.
The change agents must have excellent communication channels,
for he is often the only unbiased source of information
regarding the innovation for the farmer. To conceptualize

the change agent linkages. please refer to Figure 4.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Planners Input Suppliers
A Change
Research Agents Producers']
Marketing Consumers

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4. Change Agent Linkages

17

The Production Phase. The farm family with their
resources is the production unit. The actual production
of the crop, using the new innovation, is the major objec-
tive of the entire process. In addition to the farm
family. the production phase includes the land situation,
the prevailing level of knowledge. the influence of incen-
tives for adoption. social pressures on the adopters. the
difficulty of the methodology, the investment requirements
and the adoption process. A detailed description of the
production phase will be found in Chapter Seven.

The linkages of the producers form two constellations:
one of those who have frequent contact with the producer.
and the other. those who have only occasional contact. The
inner constellation includes the change agents. the input
suppliers and the marketing peOple. The outer constellation
is comprised of the remaining phases of the model. Please
refer to Figure 5 for a picture of the two constellations
in the production phase.

The Marketing Phase. The general area of marketing
is one of the most frequently neglected phases of the model.
Traditional marketing systems can seldom handle the large
volume of product resulting from the innovation. The
marketing phase includes both the purchasing and the distri-
bution of the product. In the purchasing function. the
buying system, the quality control standards and the price
fixing systems are included. The distribution function

18

 

 

Planners]

 

 

 

Change Marketing
Agents People

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Producers

 

 

 

 

 

 

Input SupplierS'

 

 

 

 

 

Research Consumers

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 5. Linkages of the Production Phase

includes tranSportation. storage, handling and processing.
Details on these marketing functions will be found in
Chapter Eight.

The marketing phase is the bridge between the producer

and the consumer and strong linkages are established between

19

them. Linkages with the other four phases of the model are
weaker and form the outer constellation. Figure 6 shows

these relative relationships.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Research Input Suppliers
Producers .._. Marke ting C onsumers
[Planning Change Agents]

 

 

Figure 6. Marketing Linkages

Disposition of the Coppodity. The consumption of
the product produced with the innovation is critical to

the entire process. Reluctance by the consumer to accept

the product will cause the entire process to grind to a

20

halt. The majority of the food crop produced will be
consumed locally. Surplus to local needs will be moved to
regional and national population centers and their surplus
will be exported from the country. If the product is an
export crop it will either be moved from the producer to
the processor or directly exported abroad. Details on the
disposition of the product will be found in Chapter Nine.
The linkage between marketing and the consumer is
very strong. In the case of the food production the
producer and consumer are. for a large portion of the product.'
one and the same. Marketing and the producer form the
inner consumer constellation. while a less intense linkage
consisting of the researchers, planners and change agents
form the outer constellation. Figure 7 illustrates this.
Forming the Basic Model. We have looked at each of
the component phases and their respective constellations.
Now we can assemble the basic model for the initial
implementation of the innovation. For clarity and appli-
cation of the model, the introduction of a new fertilizer-
responsive wheat variety will be used as the example.
Research has deve10ped and tested a new variety of
fertilizer-responsive wheat and delivered this information
to the planners. Upon receipt of this information, the
planners immediately evaluated the information and found
it to be suitable for implementation. A coordinated plan
is drafted as a composite of plans submitted from the input

21

 

 

 

 

Researchj Planners

 

 

 

 

 

 

Producer : C onsumeTHjuke ting

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ChangexAgentsJ

 

Figure 7. Consumer Linkages

suppliers. professional change agents, producers. marketing
peeple and consumers. The draft of the master plan is
passed to the input suppliers and change agents for imple-
mentation of the wheat innovation.

The input suppliers evaluate the draft plan and
prepare for the manufacture. distribution and sale of the
necessary inputs to the farmer. The change agents. after

receiving training. embark on a campaign to educate the

22

farmer on the new wheat innovation. Change agents receive
seed and fertilizer from the input suppliers to carry on
a field demonstration program with the farmer.

The farmer. after learning about the new wheat inno-
vation. decides to purchase seed and fertilizer. He produces
a mmch.larger crop of wheat than before and sells his surplus
to the local market. The marketing people evaluate the
quality of the wheat, determine the selling price to the
consumer and pay the farmer accordingly. The wheat is
transported to the consumer in the heavily populated area
and offered for sale. The consumer, after inspecting the
quality and determining the price he will pay. purchases
the wheat and takes it home for his family use.

The reader will note that at each step of the imple-
mentation process a message is transmitted over the infor-
mation channel. The receiver of the message evaluates the
information and acts accordingly. To conceptualize the
basic implementation model. please refer to Figure 8.

The Implementation Model In Action. The basic
model as described above is very idealistic. For clarity
of presentation we assumed that each evaluation in the
entire implementation process had a positive reaction to
the message received through the information channel. In
real life even the most successful implementation of innova-
tions does not operate this smoothly. Communication of

messages seldom conveys the information in such a clear

23

 

 

 

 

mmumssmsooTTu*mswpmxamz
soapspanpman
soapamommfia e ensconsm

msoapm>ossH HMHSPHSoanw<_hoH Hopes soapwpsmsonEH camsm .m sham“.

 

mesmmt mwsmgo

 

 

 

whoosvoum

 

mmoooum
coapdoea

Ho>aooon owdmmos on» an
cogssawiwo moposoc Aldl: .32

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

msowannsm pansH

 

unsuccessssoo

PsmsH

 

soamw>uensm .mmsoum

e weassmam no academmm coapoi
soapsasshom

hoaaom mousom .momsn.

24

manner that there is no misunderstanding. The implementation
process is not one of stratified categories where. upon
completion of one phase, the full reSponsibility is shifted
to the next. As noted in Figures 1 to 7. each phase has

its constellation of linkages that covers almost the entire
implementation Spectrum.

A more realistic approach to the implementation
process is where the phases and sub-phases interact with
each other. When a production problem with the farmer
develops. the message goes out to all phases of the process
notifying each phase of the problem and expecting each
phase to take appropriate action. The real problem arises
when the channel of communication breaks down or has exces-
sive static so that the message is badly garbled or never
transmitted. Maintenance of smooth flowing. static-free
information channels between all phases of the implementation
model is mandatory for successful implementation of agri-
cultural innovations.

Let's look at the implementation process in action
and see how it performs when problems emerge. ‘We will
continue to use the example of the new fertilizer-responsive
wheat variety but this time the farmers in one locality.
after using it for three years. discover that the new
variety is badly infested with rust.

The farmers report the rust problem to their local

extension worker who passes the message through his channels

25

to the ministry headquarters. Ministry officials immedi-
ately take steps to determine if the rust problem is
localized or wide-spread. They find that the rust is present
on 80 percent of the wheat in the country and calculate that
the harvest will be reduced by about 30 percent from the
anticipated amount. This startling information is sent from
the ministry to peOple in all phases of the implementation
process and the top government officials. The government
takes steps to import wheat in an attempt to cover the anti-
cipated loss in yield.

Research is notified by the policy formulators to find
a rust resistant variety of wheat that responds to fertilizer
and yields as much as the old variety. Input suppliers are
notified that the expected need for fertilizer will probably
be less for the next planting season. Change agents are
requested to make weekly reports on wheat harvest expecta-
tions. Farmers are requested to make every effort to save
as much wheat in the harvesting operation as possible and
are assured that a rust resistant variety will be distributed
in the near future. Marketing people are notified of a
reduction in expected harvest and that they will be handling
a large quantity of imported wheat. Consumers are asked to
use their present supply of wheat sparingly.

All these messages are fed simultaneously into the
information channel and evaluated upon receipt. If the

information channel is Open and static-free, immediate

26

positive action can be taken. If not, the busy information
channel will be overloaded with reverse directional messages
that will cause considerable delay in taking apprOpriate
action.

To look at the brighter side, let us suppose that
research has found a suitable, rust resistant wheat variety
and the government is importing a sufficient quantity to
supply each wheat farmer with a small amount. Immediately
upon this announcement. all phases of the implementation
process are notified to be prepared for reversing their
direction and ”tool up” for apprOpriate action.

The reader can now understand how complex and dynamic
is the implementation process for agricultural innovations.
For visual comprehension of this dynamic process. please

refer to the "action model” in Figure 9.

msowps>ossH Hauspasoauw<_uom Hopes sowvmpsoseHAsH s4 .m ouswam

so>dooon omsmmos one an
“8.3.3395 moposoc Allull. sec 2

Accesses“ cosmos asap osv
r,Hesss:o.soHpmshoHsH

/
w! ‘ W

vr
vV

 

mesew< owssno

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

it} soamw>nonsm .mgsoav
”Whossmcomflfifiwsapmxums+T41+mmoosuoam e wswsssam onmemmmH soapom

 

 

 

2?

mnofiflmmsm vansH

 

 

LR L A N N
/ j .I If /
muopmoassssoo
soapspwupmwn mmeoonm scandassuom
sowuamomman a seasoned sowpaop< hodaom eoHSom .mommnm

psmsH

CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH

The term ”research" used in the implementation model
refers to all forms considered research and experimentation.
For the purpose of this model, research is considered the
source of all innovations. In this sense it can be the
major contributor to the innovation or. as in the case of
the new varieties of wheat and rice, merely an evaluative
function with prediction of adaptibility.

Research is traditionally divided into basic and
applied research. Most of the less-develOped countries
(IDCs) in.the world would do well to rely upon basic research
emanating from the more-developed countries. Basic research
usually applies to all parts of the world and similar results
would be only repetitious and expensive. Most LDCs are in
short supply of experienced research people. and those they
have should concentrate on applied research. The utilization
and proper interpretation of basic research requires well-
trained and experienced researchers in each of the less-
developed countries. These research people must look upon
basic research from the standpoint of its application to

their home country.

28

29

Internationally Applicable Research

 

The recent breakthrough. now titled, ”The Green
Revolution”, (a result of the efforts of the Rockefeller
and Ford Foundation people in Mexico and the Philippines)
is an excellent example of the utilization of internationally
applicable research by many LDCs throughout Asia. As a result
of these successes in rice and wheat varieties. a number of
international research stations are being established. It
would behoove each LDC to establish very close liaison with
each and every international research station dealing with
research applicable to their country. These international
research stations are excellent sources for obtaining new
varieties by the thousands. a germ plasm bank. and in some
cases breeding stock banks. As a result of the ”Green
Revolution”, the door has been opened wider than ever for
the exchange of varietal research material. It is expected
that this exchange will greatly increase in the future.

Another ever growing source of international tech-
nological and research findings is what Lester R. Brown
(2, P. 55) calls Multi-national Agri-business Corporations.
These corporations. mostly based in the United States. are
aggressively establishing their enterprises in an ever
increasing number of LDCs. While they are naturally inter-
ested in earning profit for their stockholders, these
corporations are spreading technical knowledge and research

findings concerning fertilizer, insecticides. farm

30

machinery, management. construction. etc., that is other-
wise unavailable in many LDCs. These modern international
corporations must be regarded as an important source of
research information.

Available international research is not limited to
crap production. When preparing for the implementation of
an agricultural innovation concerning crap production. it
would be well for the LDC to also aggressively seek inter-
national research information concerning input production.
marketing, transportation, sociology. administration. insti-
tutionalization. processing. packaging. consumer preferences,
etc. When looking into the future requirements for research
availability in LDCs, it would be well to consider the
establishment of a full-time organization devoted solely
to the collection of international research. This would
include all types of research previously mentioned, plus
any other that would be deemed important to the implementa-
tion of agricultural innovations. This organization should
be operated as a knowledge bank similar to the one presently
in the U.S. Department of Agriculture. If possible it
should be computerized for quick and efficient extraction
of pertinent information.

Governmental Research
Governmental and nationally based research has several

responsibilities. It should act as the collection point for

31

all pertinent research having both direct and indirect
concern with agriculture. It is necessary to place the
very best research men available at the national level so
that proper interpretation and evaluation can be made.

The national research organization must at all times keep
every channel Open to all research sources. This would
include international. regional.local and private research
sources.

After the interpretation and evaluation of all avail—
able research, the national research organization is then
responsible for directing the in-country governmental
research and co-ordinating the various research efforts
countryéwide. This would also include the recognition of
and close liaison with multi-national agri-business
corporations within the country.

The national research program in its planning and
organization should concentrate its entire effort in the
area of applied research. In some cases. verification of
basic research may be necessary. If applicable basic
research is not available it may be necessary to conduct
some original research in a specific area. Applied research,
in order to be meaningful to the farmers in the country,
must be geared to the economic. social, and cultural
characteristics of the average farmer. Research personnel
at the national level should be required to make frequent
trips to the farming areas of the country to gather

32

first-hand knowledge of existing farm conditions. In
addition, national research personnel should also be
encouraged to make trips to international research stations
and national research stations in adjoining countries to
establish personal contact with fellow researchers concerning
specific areas of research.

As the new agricultural innovation is adepted, it
causes what is termed "second generation” problems. These
problems are the outgrowth of the rapidly increasing pro-
duction caused by large scale establishment of the new
innovation. National research personnel should be aware
of and anticipate these second generation problems well
in advance of their occurrence. Research personnel should
not limit the research to crop and livestock production
only. The research should include related areas such as
marketing of the commodity, production and utilization of
input items, irrigation water available, the peasant farmer
situation, effective production incentives, social pressures
concerning production, effective communication methods
with farmers, processing, packaging, and tranSportation of
the commodity and consumer preferences for the commodity.
Immediately following the discovery and positive evalu-
ation of a new agricultural innovation, related research
problems should be identified and solutions sought in

anticipation of the future need.

33

Economic research in connection with the new innovation
is also necessary. A cost-benefit analysis followed by
a feasibility study should be connected with any new inno-
vation. Predetermined results are vital to the sustained

utilization of the new innovation.

Regional Research

 

 

Very few countries of the world have uniform topography,
climate, soil and rainfall. Certain areas or regions of
each country are designated as the wheat area, the grazing
area, the dry land area, the irrigated area, the fruit
area, etc. This has caused research stations to be estab-
lished in the several regions Specializing in suitable
craps and livestock for that particular area. These regional
research stations function primarily for the benefit of the
local region. Because a wheat area may have some fruit
growers and irrigated areas may also have some crops grown
under dry land conditions, regions must share research
findings. Provincially oriented regional research personnel,
however, often neglect sharing their findings with other
regions and the national research organization.

An innovation or variety determined to be a good
possibility by national researchers is passed to the regional
station for adaptability and comparative testing. Local

innovations and varieties are compared with new introductions.

34

Applied research at the regional level is a vital
step in the research process. This is the most important
test for an innovation: finding out conclusively if its
adaptability suits conditions of the area. Replicated
trials should be made to validate findings for the area.
Success or failure in implementation of the innovation
depends upon the degree of certainty in research findings

at the regional research station.

Local Research

One of the best measurements of validity for research
findings from the regional level is to conduct a series of
farmer test plots at the local level. These plots are the
final step in research relating to a given innovation. Up
to this point all research has been done on government
farms under optimum conditions. The farmer test plot is
designed to ascertain how the innovation will react under
typical farming conditions. A successful series of farmer
test plots can help determine the successful application
of the innovation by farmers.

Local research can be viewed from yet another direc-
tion. Each farming community has, over the years, deveIOped
various methods of production peculiar to that community.
Some of these approaches to production are ingenious when
one considers the limited input available and adaptation

of local materials and knowledge to scientific agriculture.

35

Truly great discoveries are sometimes made by local farmers.
These unique innovations are often discovered by farmers

by accident or through an endless series of trial and error
attempts. Nevertheless, these innovations should be sought
out by the regional research men and studied. Often the
knowledge gained from this type of local research can Open

doors to solutions of a series of yet unsolved problems.

Private Research

 

The term private research in this sense refers to
research conducted by other than government Sponsorship.
Private individuals with training in technical agriculture
and companies or corporations supplying agricultural inputs
carry out research of their own. In most cases private
research is less conservative than government research. The
high degree of constraints in budget, personnel, material
and operating procedures are not usually present in private
research. One should recognize that government has little
control over private research, and its findings may often
be questionable and biased.

Freedom to pursue unorthodox lines of experimentation
often produces a major breakthrough and a new a approach to
a problem. National and regional research personnel should
contact fellow researchers in the private sector, exchange
ideas and offer support on common problems. This helps all
parties concerned and keeps everyone abreast of new devel-

Opments in a Specific area of research.

3b

Communicating Research Findings

 

Research publications are usually of a very technical
nature and often not understood by development planners and
change agents who rely on research information to carry out
their reaponsibilities. Most research peeple hesitate to
rewrite their research findings into a form for laymen to
understand. They prefer to write for research publications.
Research articles are mainly written for other researchers
in their particular field of work. In many countries there
is a possessive attitude toward research findings, and the
information is available only upon Specific request. Commun-
icating research findings to people outside of research
circles is a common problem throughout the world.

A possible solution to this problem would be the
establishment of an Extension/Research Liaison Unit in the
national research institute. This writer was instrumental
in the establishment of the Extension/Research Liaison Unit
in the Institute for Agricultural Research, Ahmadu Bello
University, Samaru, Nigeria. This liaison unit is staffed
by the Ministry of Agriculture to establish the bridge
between institute research people and the extension staff
who in turn pass the new information and innovations on
to the farmers.

The liaison unit has two major departments: (1 subject
matter Specialists who are officed with researchers in a

given discipline, and (2 an information section that uses

37

the research information furnished by the Specialists to
produce bulletins, leaflets, posters, flip charts, slides
and training aids for use by extension agents in the
field. All activities of the liaison unit are coordinated
by a unit chief and two deputies. The unit functions as a
two-way bridge disseminating research information to the
farmer via the extension agent and presenting farmers'
problems from the extension agent to research men in the
institute. In addition, the liaison unit directs the
activities of 23 audio/visual mobile units working in the
villages of the Northern States of Nigeria.

The liaison unit has enhanced the quality and quantity
of applied research accepted by farmers. Institute
research workers were at first reluctant to cooperate with
the liaison unit, but they have since gained considerable
satisfaction through the observation of the successful
adoption by farmers of recommendations resulting from their
research findings. Using current and past research infor-
mation, the liaison unit, with the soaperation of institute
researchers, has produced in a five-year period complete
sets of recommended practices on 16 major crops grown in
Northern Nigeria. Carl K. Eicher (4, P. 37) points out
the pioneering work in this area as a possible avenue

leading to the solution to this problem.

36

Functional Model for Research

 

So far in chapter three we have been looking at
research internally in its several geographical levels.

Let us now look at the linkages between research and the
other implementation factors described in the model.

Applied agricultural research institutes could be considered
service organizations serving the needs of agriculture and
related areas. To carry out this service function, link-
ages and information channels must be established in all
directions. Two-way communication channels are vital to

the success of any applied research institution.

The basis of all research is the desire for increased
production of an agricultural commodity. Constant linkages
directly to the production sector are of first priority.
This is a two-way channel of information. As pointed out
earlier, the final step in research is the farmer testing
of the innovation in ascertaining the adaptability under
normal farming conditions. This linkage does not step
here. Continual feedback must be maintained to recognize
those problems implementation has that were not initially
discovered. Continuing production research will assure
constant refinement of the innovation.

Before presentation of the new agricultural innovation
to the development planners, research must undertake initial
studies in the other sectors presented in the original

model: supply sector concerning the best available inputs:

39

change agents' approach to sociological, psychological and
cultural aSpects of the innovation: marketing systems
analysis and predictions for increased quantity of the
commodity: consumer acceptance of the new agricultural
product. These research studies should be initiated in
anticipation of questions from the development planners
concerning these ”second generation” problems.

The innovation is then presented to development
planners and implementation is planned and executed.
Initial training of change agents is the reSponsibility of
research. Transfer of accurate technical knowledge from
the researchers to the change agents is a vital link in
the implementation chain. Feedback from the several
above named sectors concerning problems encountered during
implementation is of utmost importance to research. This
is the critical stage of implementation, and research
p90ple must exert every effort to keep open the two-way
channel of information. They must deal SXpeditiously with
all problems encountered and feed recommendations to the
appropriate sectors as quickly as possible. Many of these
problems will be presented to research via the change
agents, but research peOple must not rely solely on this
source. Direct information channels must be maintained to

all sectors.

CHAPTER 4
POLICY FORMULATION - AGRICULTURE DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING AND SUPERVISION

Development planning in agriculture takes place at
all levels. At the international level development planning
takes place in such institutions as the World Bank, Ford
and Rockefeller Foundations, Asia Foundation, foreign aid
programs of donor countries and the United Nations. National
agriculture planning is most often related in LDCs as a
portion of the five-year development plan. Too often agri-
culture development planning in an LDC stOps at the national
level. As we will discuss later, to stOp at this level
often renders a good agriculture development plan ineffective.
Regional and local planning should be considered the core of
the planning process. National planning is basically an
assimilation of regional and local development plans.

The basic purpose of agriculture deve10pment planning
is the acceleration and increased efficiency made possible
through coordination. This coordination is based upon an
over-all view of the entire developmental process. According
to Mellor (7, P. 379), a development plan involves three
areas: 1) governmental direct allocation and control of

resources: 2) private resources controlled and directed by

40

41

government: 3) private resources guided by government
through the use of incentives and market manipulations.

Only a very limited amount of the total agricultural
resources can be made available for implementation of a
single innovation without causing a considerable reduction
in resource availability in other production areas. The
major problem in correctly allocating limited resources is
the difficulty in determining the rate of reSponse to the
innovation.

A Specific set of objectives for the implementation
of a given agricultural innovation must be formulated as
a beginning Step in development planning. The policy
formulated is an outgrowth of these Specific objectives.
Positive contributions to the growth and development of a
country are possible only if planning accelerates and makes
deve10pment more efficient. This comparison can be made
with that development which would take place naturally.

In Chapter Three, we emphasized the necessity for
adequate and proven information from researchers as a
vital ingredient for development. Planning relies solely
upon the information available to the planners. Some of
this information is gained through the past experiences of
planners themselves, but the majority is that information
passed to the planners from research. If the information
available is incorrect or inadequate, planning may give

poorer or at least no better results than if there were no

42

planning at all. Development planners should explore
all possible sources of information considered relevant
to the implementation of the agricultural innovation in
question. They then must evaluate information they have
collected to determine whether this innovation warrants
implementation and, if so, to what extent.

A rule of thumb regarding reSponse is for the new
innovation to produce an easily observed increase in
production of at least 35 percent. (ll, P. 7) Where agri-
cultural implementation efforts have a long history of
failures this minimum should be raised to 50 or in some
cases 100 percent increase in production. The farmer
should not be expected to change his methods drastically
from these of the past in order to achieve the expected
level of increased production. Also, a high cash invest-
ment will greatly limit the number of farmers who can
enjoy the added profits from a new innovation.

The planning process is often misunderstood. We
often think of planning taking place only in the head-
quarters planning office. However, this office merely
acts as a coordinator, and the actual planning takes place
elsewhere. In order to identify the actual planners of
an innovation, an example of the implementation of an
agronomic innovation may be of assistance.

When research peeple discover a new crop variety, they

select the optimum set of companion inputs to arrive at the

43

most favorable level of production. They present a plan

of production to the planning organization including the

new variety, input requirements, necessary cultural practices
and the eXpected yield from this combination. The planning
organization studies the research production plan and evalu-
ates its implementation possibilities.

The planning organization then determines the amount
of input supplies needed and requests the supply institutions
to submit their plans to meet these requirements. Change
agents are requested by the planning organization to submit
their plan of implementation that is a result of preliminary
pilot approaches to farmers. These preliminary efforts
should reflect farmer reSponse to incentives, methodology,
investment and social pressures concerning the innovation.

The marketing peeple are requested to submit a plan
for marketing the increased volume of the crop including
quality control, price fixing, tranSportation, storage and
processing. Consumer acceptance of the new variety should
be tested to alleviate any later problems. Consumption of
the crap at local, regional and national levels should be
studied. Possibilities for export should also be evaluated
for the future.

When the planning organization receives these several
proposed plans, they are finally in a position for a re-

evaluation of implementation possibilities. Only after

44

this re-evaluation can the final decision for implementation

be made.
Economichnalysis of the_;nnovation

The planning organization is now in a position to
conduct a comprehensive economic analysis. All factors of
implementation should be analyzed independently and then
collectively. This monumental task can be allocated to
various institutions capable of such an economic analysis.
These might include universities, economic institutes,
large supply corporations and credit institutions. The
reSponsibility for the composite economic analysis should

rest on the staff of the planning organization.

Feasibility Study of the Proposal

The reSponsibility of the planning organization does
not stop with the composite economic analysis of the
implementation proposal. The planners must also recognize
non-economic factors affecting the success or failure of
the prOposal and the long-range implications resulting
from the adOption of the plan. These non-economic factors
include the political implications, probable cultural
changes, international trade relationships, structural changes
in the society and other ”second generation" problems. A
feasibility study must recognize both the economic and the
non-economic aSpects of the implementation process of new

agricultural innovations.

45

The feasibility study is probably the most difficult
part of the entire planning process. It must be conducted
by country nationals who can prOperly evaluate the non-
economic factors and make predictions in accordance with
government policy. Foreign advisers are of most use in
helping the LDC to analyze the economic SSpects of the plan.
The quality and extent of an in-depth feasibility study
will often predict the success or failure of the plan.

Up to this point the implementation plan is still
in a fluid state. Several points have been clarified and
some aSpects of the plan are fairly firm. There are still
a few a8pects that should be pursued before the actual plan

can be written.

Consequences of Implementation

 

 

Implementation of a plan for a new agricultural
innovation will cause many changes in the society. These
changes will include those that will be considered for the
better and also those for the worse. Development is such
a dynamic process with a complexity of intervening variables
that the consequences of implementation are often unpredict-
able. However, this is not to say that we should not concern
ourselves with the consequences. Many of them can be predicted,
eSpecially those economic factors at work in the country.
Identification of as many consequences of implementation as

possibile should be made as the policy and plan are formulated.

4b

The consequences, as they come to be recognized, can change
the strategy of the plan considerably.

Various tribes, nations, and social systems of the
world have deve10ped a set of cultural characteristics
over extended periods of history which are best for them,
in their particular situation. Rogers (13, P. 11/5) calls
this "cultural relativism." For example, en-Iranian farmer
repeatedly refused to grow the new dwarf wheat variety.
When asked why, he replied, "Your wheat is short and ugly.
My wheat is tall and beautiful and waves gracefully in the
breeze.“

The innocent promotion of an innovation with dire
consequences is usually caused by a lack of empathy on the
part of planners and change agents. Unless force is applied,
the farmer will usually reject the innovation forthwith,
much to the consternation of planners and change agents.
In defense of their plan for the innovation, planners and
change agents (foreign advisers also) will label peasant
farmers stupid, ignorant, tradition-bound and fatalists.
Peasant farmers would probably have adopted the innovation
if the approach had been altered to more closely fit their
social, cultural and economic situation.

Planners and change agents should be ever alert to
detect adverse consequences and prepared to alter their
implementation plan to overcome this adverse situation.

Conversely, they should also be alert to positive consequences

47

and swing their implementation activities more aggressively
in that direction.

In conclusion, planners and change agents should
keep in mind what Spicer (16, P. 13) says, "Changing peOple's
customs is an even more delicate reSponsibility than

surgery.“

Incentives for Adaption

 

Incentives can be a strong motivating force to
encourage the adoption of an innovation by a farmer,
Price incentives loom highest on the list. Price incentives
are not limited to the sale price of the agriculturul
product by the farmer. Those peasant farmers who consume
practically all of the product in their home are not
greatly affected by the sale price. The price incentive
for the agricultural inputs such as seed and fertilizer is
much more meaningful to that farmer.

If the innovation is a non-consumable product on
the farm such as rubber, tea, coffee, etc., the entire
range of price incentives can be put into action. In the
case of consumable products, the price incentives should
be placed on the inputs, thus causing a marketable surplus
of the product on the farm. At this point, the farmer is
moved by the market price of his consumable product.
Except for isolated instances, all farmers in the world

market some portion of their farm production.

46

The planners must determine where innovations fit
into the farmer's production pattern. Then they can deter-
mine which of the price incentives will most actively
support adoption of the innovation.

Historically, price policy in many LDCs has been
negative. Many governments consider higher prices for
food creps undesirable because of greater cost to urban
residents resulting in unwanted wage increases. The
same is true for industrial raw materials that are raised
on the farm and processed in.urban centers. Even SXport
agriculture is held at depressed prices to allow a heavy
export tax on eXport commodities and still be competitive
on world markets. A possible prerequisite for implementation
may have to be removal of the price constraint.

Incentives can be used in sectors of the model other
than production. It may be necessary to offer import and
tax-free concessions to international fertilizer companies
to encourage local production in support of an agronomic
innovation. They may come in the form of duty free import-
ation of farm machinery. Other incentives paying farmers to
store grain on their farms to ease the strain on storage
facilities, subsidizing marketing cooperatives to build
storage facilities and paying innovative farmers for each
fellow farmer he convinces to use the new innovation.

Resources for incentive payments are limited, and
selection of the one or two that will best accelerate imple-
mentation is a difficult task.

49

Institutionalizationfiof the Plan

 

The most prevalent conception of an institution is
the "tOp-down" type as described by Wharton. (19, P. 8)

He argues for increased emphasis on the "bottom-up" and
increasingly decentralized institutions.

"The most effective execution of agricultural devel-
opment is that which decentralizes as much as possible
those planning decisions to a level where localized know-
ledge of needs and requirements are best known and which
integrates local, regional, and national planning in a
'bottom-up' fashion in those areas where overall coordi-
nation is required."

He continues: "My criticism is that"bottom-up'
efforts have been seriously neglected with disastrous
consequences - both economical and political."

Let us look at those areas in the implementation of
agricultural innovations that require coordination at
every level. Basically we are channeling all our efforts
toward convincing the production sector to adOpt the new
innovation. Previously in this chapter we have discussed
farmer incentives, consequences of implementation,
feasibility studies, and social and cultural constraints.
All of these point to the fact that the root of the entire
problem of implementation is the farmer.

Would it not, then, be logical that the major insti-

tution reSponsible for implementation should be oriented in

50

a "bottom-up" approach? This entire implementation organ-
ization should be intimately ”tuned in" on what the farmer
will reSpond to positively. The only way for this to be
accomplished satisfactorily is to involve the farmer in the
initial planning process. The starting point for the
implementation planning process should be the SXpressed need
by the farmer. Planners should place much weight on infor-
mation at hand that has come to them directly from the
farmer.

Now let us look at some of the institutions concerned
with input and marketing. The general tendency is for
LDCS to form governmental institutions (often at the
insistence of foreign advisers) to handle seed, fertilizer,
insecticides and machinery. Credit and marketing also
often fall into this category. Planners should look care-
fully at the tremendous burden these institutions are to
an already understaffed and relatively ineXperienced civil
service. Depending on the particular country situation,
it might be well to encourage the private sector to handle
the importation, sales and distribution of input commodities.
Marketing is almost always traditionally in the private
sector but in need of improvement. Credit is urban
oriented in a formal sense, but in an LDC many times more
credit is being extended to farmers by local money lenders.

In summary, the agri-business side of institutional

development Should be in the hands of the private sector

51

as much as is politically possible. On the other hand,
the institutional reSponsibility for research, education,
policy, change agents and regulatory services should be
the government's reSponsibility. Governmental institution-
alization should be confined to those areas where it can
excel while the private sector is free and encouraged to
deve10p those institutions for which they are best
suited. According to Esman (5, P. 2) "Institution-
building is a guidance and social learning process, not
the 'installation' of prepackaged foreign technologies."

Planners should evaluate the deve10pmental capabil-
ities of the institutions that may be involved in the
proposed plan. A critical evaluation will no doubt uncover
many aSpects of the involved institutions that are
undesirable. The question then becomes whether to correct
the undesirable aSpects or create new institutions to
handle the job. A word of caution: in almost all cases,
it is better to use existing institutions in preference
to creating new ones. Existing organizations offer staff,
facilities, legitimacy and seniority and would actively
oppose formation of a duplicate institution. Create new
institutions for only those aSpects where no suitable
institution now exists.

How does one evaluate the development potential of
an institution? Esman (5, P. 6) divides an institution

into two general groups of variables: ”institution

52

variables, which are essentially concerned with the organ-
ization itself: and linkage variables, which are mainly
concerned with external relations.“ Too often an institu-
tional evaluation looks long and hard at the former and
only glances at the external linkages.

For further guidance on evaluation, Esman defines
institutional variables as "leadership, doctrine, programs,
resources and internal structures.” The institutional
variables are connected to the linkage variables through
”transactions." Linkage variables are identified as
"enabling linkages, functional linkages, normative link—
ages and diffuse linkages.“ Planners, when evaluating.
institutions, would do well to analyze institutions using

the above mentioned headings.

Supervisory Personnel and Their Functions

Planners. The value of a plan for a new innovation
is the implementation supervision. Planners themselves
are the major supervisors. The plan should at all times
during implementation be considered only a draft. An
effective implementation plan should be constantly under
revision according to information furnished from all sectors
of the model. Planners should actively seek this information
through frequent contact with reSponsible people in all
implementation phases. They should also travel to the

"action Sites" to observe the implementation in action.

53

Considerable insight into problem areas can be accomplished
by planners who understand the overall objectives and
inter-relationships of the plan. The supervisory function
of the planners is a continuing activity.

Mipistgy Officials. A considerable amount of the
administration and implementation of the plan falls on
ministry officials. These officials, to be effective,
should consider it to be their plan and accept full
reSponsibility for its implementation. With this reSpon-
sibility goes the authority and supervisory reSponsibility.
Communication between the planners and ministry officials
must be maintained to insure accurate interpretation of
all aSpects of the plan. Only then can ministry officials
prOperly supervise the activities in the plan. They should
exercise the authority to refine the action phases of the
plan and make on-the-Spot decisions and changes. This
authority should be passed all the way down the organization
structure. Control of this authority can be realized through
reasonably close supervision at all levels and must be held
personally reSponsible for their segment of implementation.

Aggicultural.Educgtops. For the purpose of the model,
the agricultural educators will be considered anyone who
is formally involved in communicating information about
the innovation to the uninformed. This would include

researchers who train planners, change agents, suppliers,

54

farmers, change agents and marketing people on certain
a8pects of the plan. Similar examples could be given
for the other sectors of the model.

Probably the most monumental task in agricultural
education concerning the innovation is the training of
change agents. The successful use of the innovation is
dependent upon accurate interpretation of information.
This is a vital part of agricultural education. If change
agents are taught about use of seeds and fertilizer only,
lack of knowledge concerning the companion cultural
practices could easily Spell failure in implementation.
Accuracy in relating vital concepts, such as fertilizer
rates, is necessary to diSplay significant observable
results.

Educators must exercise supervisory authority over
information concerning the innovation. In order to be
realistic in exercising authority, the educators cannot
restrict their activities to the classroom. They must
follow-up their educational efforts to evaluate the
effectiveness of their instruction. This would involve
observation of students on-the-job and discussions with
their supervisors. These contacts should result in constant
revision of the presentation to increase effectiveness.

Policy formulation is a dynamic process. The planners
are to be considered coordinators of information. This

role of a coordinator requires a smoothly operated set of

55

communication channels with as little static as possible
running to all sectors of the model. Assimilation, conden-
sation and evaluation of information is the prime reSponsi-
bility of the planning people.

The other member of the policy team is the supervisory
team. In many cases the same people are involved in
both planning and supervision. Planning should take place
at all supervisory levels. Often the most effective plans
are drawn up by the people who will also be carrying out
the plan. These people must be supervised, however, to
insure that the plans are in support of the general
policy. If the policy is in error in some manner, this
problem should be passed on to the policy makers. The
subordinate planners should wait for a ruling on the policy

before changing their plans.

CHAPTER 5
SUPPLY OF INPUTS

One of the most difficult implementation problems
is making available an ample supply of input materials
at the right place at the right time. The problem is one
of monumental proportions in most LDCS. Within country
availability is only half of the problem. The more diffi-
cult problem is the logistical one of distribution of in-
puts within easy access of the farmer. In many cases the
production expertise necessary for in-country inputs such
as fertilizer and insecticides is available only from for-
eign sources. In this case an LDC would be advised to
encourage foreign companies through import-free and tax-
free incentives to bring not only their technology but also
management, distribution, sales and capital resources into
the country.

The private sector has the capacity and the experience
to furnish the supply of inputs. For government to attempt
to be businessmen and manufacturers often prevents the inno-
vation from succeeding. Governmental functions in the
supply sector should be limited to those functions they can

best carry out. In addition to the aforementioned incentives,

56

'57

these include regulatory functions to protect the farmer,
quality standards, tranSportation facilities such as har-
bors, roads and railroads, credit guarantees, land reclama-
tion, etc. In all cases, governmental involvement in the
supply sector should concentrate on encouraging the private
sector to furnish the farmer good quality input materials
at a price the farmer can afford.

Often the governmental institutions must "seed the
market” before entrepreneurs will consider the venture
economically feasible. An example would be governmental
importation of fertilizer for an introductory period of
three years. The second year the government announces to
the private sector that they will import fertilizer only
one more year and the private sector is free to do so at
any time. If the private sector has confidence in this
announcement, they will take immediate steps to set up
fertilizer enterprises.

The problem then becomes, will it be more economical
to import fertilizer or produce it within the country?

The deciding factors for this problem are the projected
local demand and the available raw materials. If the
product can be imported more cheaply and foreign exchange
is not in short supply, it may be advantageous to import
the product indefinitely. This would be eSpecially true

when considering fairly sophisticated farm machinery and

58

tractors. Bulky, low cost-by-volume materials may necessi-
tate in-country production because of tranSportation costs.
TranSportation costs double the price of delivered in-country

fertilizer shipped from Karachi, Pakistan to Afghanistan.

Supply of Seeds

When a new variety has been found by researchers and
put into the plan, it is necessary to multiply the variety
or strain to make a sufficient quantity available to the
farmers. There are several ways to accomplish this. The
most expensive way is through governmental seed multipli-
cation farms: this is expensive in terms of personnel, pro-
duction costs and distribution. A better way might be pro-
ducing seed through an association or cooperative consisting
of farmers who specialize in seed multiplication. In this
case seed purity and quality can be easily controlled.
Probably the most efficient method of seed multiplication is
where very small quantities of seed are distributed to a few
farmers in each community in the form of a demonstration
plot. These farmers save the seed for their own use and
either sell or barter off the surplus to their neighbors.
The only problem with this method is the difficulty in main-
taining purity.

Seeds as an important base for an innovation have

several advantages over the other inputs. Most farmers

59

need to buy only the initial quantity and can save seed
thereafter to supply future needs. If the farmer is of a
very low income group, he does not need to place an undue
strain upon his meager savings. Seeds are not new to the
farmer. They do not in themselves introduce a new technology
in selection, handling, storage or planting. Farmers, there-
fore, accept an improved seed variety faster than the other
parts of the innovation package such as fertilizer, insect-

icides, and machinery.

Supply of Fertilizer

In Spite of the required cash outlay, farmers are so
startled at the results of fertilizer application that
they often make rash judgments. Farmers like the immediate
reSponse and the lush growth resulting from the application
of nitrogen fertilizer. In most LDCS nitrogen, phoSphate
and potash fertilizers are sold separately. Consequently,
many farmers apply only nitrogen and are dissillusioned
when their yield is little better than the unfertilized
crOp. Since phoSphate and potash individually do not Show
a striking observable difference in growth, few farmers
appreciate the value of these fertilizers.

When planning the fertilizer phase of the implemen-
tation plan, it would be advisable to consider making
available only the mixed fertilizer suitable for the major

6O

soil type of the major producing area and the particular
crop involved. This approach would make it possible to
market “wheat fertilizer” or “rice fertilizer" and farmers
would only need to learn how much to apply to a given area.
The bag could have the picture of a wheat or rice plant
stamped on the bag to make it easily identifiable for the
illiterate farmer.

Size of bag is also an important item when dealing
in relatively small quantities. Bag size should be deter-
mined by the usual mode of tranSporting the fertilizer by
the farmer from the buying point to his home and on to his
fields. In Nigeria fertilizer is packaged in 56 pound bags
which are considered the maximum head load for carrying
distances of several miles. Another criterion for size is
the price of a single bag. If a bag of one hundred-weight
is relatively high for a small farmer to buy, he will buy
a half a bag. This opens the door for traders to sell
short weights and adulterate the product. Also, large bags
tend to break open more easily with the repeated handling

they receive in most LDCS.

Supply of Insecticides

In the process of agricultural development, the use
of insecticides for crap production appears to follow that

of seeds and fertilizer. Improved seed varieties fed by

6l

moderate amounts of fertilizer produce abundant lush growth
that seems to encourage increased insect papulations. At
first farmers are reluctant to Spend the time and money to
control insects which they have learned to accept as in-
evitable. Not until the insect population grows to large
prOportions will most farmers start the application of
insecticides. Introduction of insecticides too early in
the implementation of a crap production innovation will
probably be ignored by most farmers.

Most small farmers in LDCS are not comfortable using
powerful chemicals. Wood ash or tobacco stems are all
they have ever used. Wholesale destruction of living things
(insects) is often against their beliefs. At first intro-
duction to insecticides, farmers handle them as they would
wood ashes. The danger to their personal health and that of
their family is not readily recognized. For this reason,
non-toxic multi-use insecticides should be introduced at
first so that they can learn to handle agricultural chemi—
cals with the least personal harm.

Size of package is even more important with insecti-
cides than with fertilizer. Packages should be small enough
so that the entire package will be used in a normal (small)
application. Unused portions stored in farmers' houses

present a serious hazard.

62

Insecticides requiring expensive Sprayers or dusters
should be introduced after farmers have had some exposure
to and successful experience with inexpensive equipment
such as cloth shaker bags or garden Sprinkler-can applicators.
Large semi-mechanized farmers do not need to go through these
stages, but in most cases they will adopt insecticide appli-
cations without concentrated efforts on the part of change
agents. If the insecticide program is aimed at the average
or middle-size farmer, the larger farmers will also benefit

from the program.

Supply of MQChigegy

Peasant farmers in most LDCS use only those farm
implements that can be made in their home village. Wooden
implements predominate. A small piece of metal is usually
applied to the wearing points of implements such as a metal
sleeve for the wooden plow points. The African hoe has a
metal cutting blade.

When we consider mechanization for implementing the
innovation, we must first decide the class of farmers we
wish to reach. The most dramatic (and the easiest) to
reach are the relatively wealthy progressive farmers who
are anxious to modernize their operation with American
equipment. Foreign advisers feel more confident working at

this level for their experience is in this field. The

63

economic impact of this input can be rapid in terms of
both crap production and investment opportunities.

Machinery suppliers would do well to explore also
the possibility of making available to the average farmer
those implements that are an adaptation and improvement
on the present implements. Start with the most important
piece of equipment that is most in need of improvement.

One of the greatest problems for improving farm produc-

tivity is mechanization for the small farmer. His acreage

is small and his ability to invest in machinery is low.

Slight improvement upon present implements for the average
farmer will have a higher lasting impact upon total produc-
tion than introduction of modern machinery by wealthy farmers.

Farm mechanization is like climbing a ladder. Farmers
need to put their foot on each step of the mechanization
ladder. We can help farmers to climb faster but we must
not encourage peasant farmers to leap from the bottom rung
to the tap. They will undoubtedly fall.

The critical stages of production that the average
farm implements cannot cape with must be considered first.
In the case of recent experience with large increases in
yield of wheat and rice, the harvesting stage is a bottle-
neck. Using traditional methods many Asian farmers cannot
complete harvest before the next planting season arrives.
When faced with this problem farmers are receptive to im-

proved harvesting equipment they can afford to purchase.

64

Distribption of Inputs

The problem of distribution of inputs within access
of the average farmer is crucial. We have often heard of
successful extension programs using fertilizer, insecticides
or a Specific variety of seed that the farmer cannot acquire
within 50 miles of his home.

The old army saying, "Don't advance in an offensive
beyond your supply lines,“ applies in this case. Do not
demonstrate the innovation in areas that you cannot assure
an ample supply easily accessible and at the prOper time.

It also does little good to have innovation inputs distri-
buted and ready to sell in areas where farmers are still un-
aware of the innovation.

The advantage of the private sector handling Supply
of inputs was discussed earlier. An effective distribution
system is an expensive undertaking and establishing a sep-
arate system for each input is unnecessary. It is much
better for the farmers to have one buying station in a
community, at least in the early stages. It would be well
to encourage the suppliers of fertilizer, insecticides, farm
equipment and possibly seed to combine and establish one
distribution system. ‘When a second fertilizer supplier
comes on the scene, he will team up with a second farm
equipment and insecticide supplier to establish a second

distribution system. In this manner there is both economy

65

in distribution and convenience to the farmer plus the com-
petition to hold prices down. Most parts of the develOping
world market commodities in a bazaar market-stall system.
This prOposed distribution System may lead the way to more

efficiency in the bazaar.

Credit for Purchase 0; Inputs

Need for production credit in agriculture rises out
of the seasonal nature of production: however, consumption
of agricultural products is continuous and the available
supply diminishes from harvest time onward. Provisions
of production inputs requires a saving from the past har-
vest or credit borrowed against a future harvest. In the
early stages of adopting new innovations the requirement
for investment by the farmer is relatively small, but his
needs increase rapidly with additional participation in
the adoption process.

Proper timing for credit availability is critical
to the success of a production credit program. Credit
must be available well ahead of seasonal utilization of
the input and, more important, after the farmer has used his
own savings for his initial purchase of inputs. The prime
source of financing for farm inputs is the family. Only
when this source is exhausted will the farmer resort to

other sources. In most LDCS borrowing money by middle and

66

low income farmers is considered a form of oppression and
should be used only as the last resort.

When extending credit for the promotion of an agri-
cultural innovation, one must be sure the credit is for
production, not consumption. Mellor (7, p. 315) explains,
”Money borrowed for the purchase of seed may be used to
purchase seed which would have been purchased in any case
and thereby allows expenditure on consumption items which
would not otherwise have been purchased." This is not to
say increased consumption is not good but that it should
come after the farmer has earned the opportunity for in-
creased consumption on a sustained basis.

Planners would be advised to schedule most of their
production credit in the adoption phase of the innovation
and encourage farmers to use their own finances for the
trial phase. Many will claim that the innovation will
never get started if we expect farmers to finance them-
selves in the beginning: however, most farmers have a
little "mattress money" available for purchase of suffi-
cient inputs to try the innovation on a small portion
of one of their plots. After the farmer has successfully
tried the innovation on his farm, he immediately becomes
a better credit risk. He then is anxious to Spread the
innovation to a larger portion of his farm and actively

seeks the necessary credit to do so.

67

He will no doubt seek credit from family members
first. This is probably the best source of credit with
little or no interest. His next source would be the tradi-
tional money lender in the community. Mellor (7, p. 317)
states that ”in the All-India Rural Credit' Survey, 70
percent of the rural credit is handled by money lenders and
only 6 percent from cooperatives and government agencies.“
Interest rates average about 20 percent in India as com-
pared to 6 to 12 percent paid by farmers in high-income
countries. The high interest rates in India stem from the
high risks and very high administrative costs of loans
equivalent to 25 or 50 dollars.

Most foreign advisers look upon money lenders as
”loan sharks” who are squeezing the last cent out of the
poor peasant farmer. This is not necessarily true. They
perform a service to farmers that, thus far at least,
governmental agencies in the LDCS cannot furnish without
huge subsidies and losses from overhead expenses. Govern-
ments in LDCS would be wise to encourage money lenders to
continue their service to farmers but to impose a few
restrictions to protect the farmer. One of these restric-
tions should be that all production loans only involve the
crap to be produced as collateral and not the land on which

the cr0p is growing.

68

A possible approach to supervised credit for village
farmers might be the combination of the money lender and
the change agent. It appears that these two are the best
equipped to carry outsupervised credit at the local level.
This no doubt is taking place to a great extent in a natural
manner in those areas of the world where the ”Green Revolu-
tion" is in progress. Official encouragement of this approach

might accelerate the adoption of agricultural innovations.

TranSportation Availability

Large scale adoption of an agricultural innovation
usually puts extreme stress on existing tranSportation
facilities. The fast and efficient movement of inputs to
thousands of farmer buying points is a perplexing problem.
Traditional methods of tranSporting materials seldom can
handle the accelerated requirements.

Repeatedly governmental agencies in LDCS have attempted
and failed to move agricultural inputs Within their countries.
This again is a clear case where the private sector can
handle the job faster and more efficiently. Government
should encourage the tranSportation industry to expand to
make possible the movement of a greatly accelerated amount
of inputs. Incentives such as reduced import duty on trucks
would help in this case. Another encouragement would be
a stepped up road construction program. A network of roads
is vital for tranSporting input materials to buying points

easily accessable to farmers.

69

Fpnctiopal Model fpr Aggicultural Ipppts

In this chapter, we have explored the vital position
the private sector plays in supplying agricultural inputs
in support of agricultural innovations. Linkages between
manufacturers and consumers of these inputs must be main-
tained. Other linkages with input suppliers would be
with research to determine recommended quality and quantity
requirements, with planners and policy makers to anticipate
need and incentives available for supply of inputs, with
change agents to coordinate supply and demonstration of the
inputs, and with marketing people to determine future needs
and coordination of activities.

Establishment of effective channels of information
between governmental agencies and the private sector is
difficult. There is mutual distrust and constant maneuver-
ing by both parties to gain an advantage. Extra effort
should be exerted by all parties to establish cooperation,
coordination, and a team Spirit for the implementation of
a new agricultural innovation. Undue regulatory control
over the private sector can prevent successful implementation.

Static-free channels of information should be establish-
ed. Constant communication between government and the pri-
vate sector will eliminate most of the static. A sincere
appreciation of the other man's problems can be accomplished

through communication.

CHAPTER 6
CHANGE AGENTS AND THEIR FUNCTION

A change agent is any person who attempts to influence
others to adapt a decision he deems desirable. Change agents
can influence change in both a positive and a negative manner.
Basically the change agent is one who communicates new ideas
to others. We normally think of change agents as professional
agricultural extension workers, both governmental and com-
mercial. In addition, professional change agents include
school teachers, politicians, and salesmen.

The change agents who directly affect change to the
greatest extent in LDCS are the volunteer communicators.

Some examples are traders, migrant laborers and herdsmen,
community leaders and truck or bus drivers. These peOple
move about the country and see or hear about things that
are new and interesting and pass the ideas on to others.
Volunteer communicators are the bridge between the govern-
mental system and the village pe0ple. Their function is
vital in legitimizing a new innovation. Even more impor-
tant legitimizers are family members who have left the
village to work in the city or obtain higher education.
Almost invariably these people are consulted by the family

regarding adoption of a new innovation.

7O

71

Professional Change Agents

 

Discussing the professional change agent, Rogers
(13, P. 257) states "Perceptions of the change agent by his
client system may affect his success in securing change.
These perceptions vary on the basis of the social charac-
teristics of his clients, and partly determine how much
communication a client will have with a change agent.
Research results show that change agents reach the upper
social status portion of their clientele diSprOportion-
ately more than the lower strata."

Social status and level of education have a very
high correlation in most LDCS. This presents the problem
of placing a professional change agent in a village where
his educational level is much higher than the average
farmer. According to Rogers (13, P. 176), he will probably
have contact only with the farmers in the high social strata
of the village. More effective change agents would be
those with an educational level only slightly higher than
the average farmer and equal to that of the better educated
farmers of the village. A change agent of this description
should have received Special training on the subject
matter for the innovation and receive close supervision
from a change agent of higher education. In this case
a supervisor to subordinates ratio should be no more

than 1:4.

72

Effective village change agents are those who identify
themselves with the village pe0ple and minimize their
identity with the bureaucracy they represent. The super-
visor would, no doubt, instead identify himself more closely

with the bureaucracy.

The Extension Agent

 

Acceptance and prestige in the village is something
the extension agent must earn. This is accomplished in
several ways. First, he should establish himself as a
resident intending to remain a part of the community
indefinitely. .He Should participate in local social and
cultural activities, and, therefore, should already be
a member of the ethnic group. He should carefully select
his cooperating farmers for the initial implementation of
the innovation. He should establish his demonstrations
with no less than three cooperating farmers so if one or
even two of his demonstrations Should fail, he would have
at least one that is successful. His prestige is enhanced
if he can bring important pe0ple from outside the village
to see the farmer's demonstration and arrange for a mobile
cinema to visit the village. The supervisor has the reSpon-
sibility of insuring that the village change agent receives
the best possible logistical support.

The manner in which the change agent presents the

new innovation to the farmer is extremely important. There

73

are two schools of thought on this point. One approach

is to present it to the farmer in small segments such as
new seed this year, fertilizer next year, insecticides

the next, etc. The other approach is to present the
farmer with a new system of producing the crop in question
as an innovation package.

The package approach is winning favor over the seg-
mented approach in recent years for several reasons. Each
production input factor is interrelated and to use one
factor without the others will not give the desired results.
Farmers will adopt only those new innovations that Show a
a striking observable increase over the old method.
Maximum results can only be shown when all the ingredients
of the package such as seed, fertilizer, insecticides,
farm machinery and cultural practices are demonstrated.
Farmers readily understand the inter-relationships of the
package components. Logistical problems for the village
change agents are minimized when he is presented with a
literal package of a complete set of inputs for each of

his demonstrations.

School Teachers

 

Village school teachers in the role of a change
agent are looked upon slightly differently than the
extension agent. Most village pe0ple consider education

one of the most important eSpects of progress. The

74

teacher is the symbol of education and is held in high
regard. He is not only looked upon as the educator of
children in the village, but is also consulted by the
adults on any matter requiring an educated background.
Many problems, such as legal questions, have nothing to
do with his training: however, he is used as a consultant,
adviser and legitimizer for things pertaining to moderni-
zation.

Village schools often have school gardens or small
farms as a part of rural education. The teacher will
often carry out demonstrations of new innovations on the
school land and will then be in a position to Speak with
authority on the innovation. The school children will
carry home information on the new innovation thus alerting
their parents. The influence of children upon their

parents should not be underestimated by the change agents.

Politicians as Change Agents

 

In most LDCS over the world, politics play a very
important part in the everyday life of most people.
Politicians are professionals at swaying pe0p1e's thinking
to their point of view. Professional change agents are
usually promoting innovations that have received political
sanction and support during the planning stages. The

production imports such as seed, fertilizer, insecticides. and

75

machinery usually have political overtones. Politicians
often state, “See what I have brought here to help you
grow better craps?”

In most LDCS, politicians have committed themselves
to supporting the new innovations. They are constantly
promoting adoption with their constituents. In local as
well as national Speeches these innovations receive constant
reference.

Most foreign advisers would prefer to see agricul-
tural innovations divorced from politics: however, this
is not the trend in most LDCS. It would be well to
recognize the role politicians play as change agents and
insure that the content of their Speeches and discussions
is accurate concerning the innovation. Encourage politicians
to visit demonstration plots and experiment stations and

possibly carry out the innovation on their own farms.

Communicationsflin_a Campaign Approach

 

When launching a new innovation, it would be well to
consider a campaign approach. A campaign approach is one
in which all available communication facilities are mobilized
to present a new idea and cover the same message through
the use of all media. In this case the farmer should hear
of the new innovation from many different sources, each

telling basically the same story.

76

The availability of communication facilities differs
according to time and place. Each campaign should be
tailor-made for the innovation and the situation. Detailed
planning of the campaign well in advance of implementation
will pay large dividends. Remember that a campaign supports
the change agent efforts in the village and in no way
replaces him. The campaign will not cause adoption of the
innovation. It merely arouses awareness and interest
through exposure to the information.

In most LDCS, the literacy rate in the rural areas
is relatively low. In recognition of this, the campaign
should utilize primarily those methods of communicating
such as radio, slides, movies, photographs, tape recordings,
etc. In addition, materials could be produced for use by
the village change agent such as posters, leaflets, flip
books, samples, models, etc. Printed materials should be
colorful and predominately line drawings with simple
lettered captions. Illiterates can quickly learn to
understand line drawings, and the captions can be read by
the school children and other literates.

Volunteer Communicators

 

The effective use of volunteer communicators
depends entirely upon their exposure to factual informa-
tion regarding the innovation. One of the hazards in
transmitting information by this means is the misquoted

77

messages. Often a volunteer communicator overhears part
of a conversation or sees a demonstration plot and makes
his own assumption as to the inputs and techniques. One
of the best ways to reduce misinformation is through a
full coverage campaign approach to reinforce the facts
via the various media. Radio is one of the most effective
reinforcements. The use of mobile sound-exhibit units at
the market place also helps to convey the true story to
volunteer communicators. A concentrated effort should

be made to impress the volunteers favorably and arm them
with the correct information.

Community leaders are the most effective among the
volunteer communicators. They exert considerable influence
in the community and lend creditability to the innovation.
These leaders are sometimes termed opinion leaders in
the Specific area of the innovation. Rogers (14, P. 236)
states that "there is very little overlap among different
types of cpinion leaders.” .An opinion leader on sheep
production is seldom consulted on any other subject. In
the village the most effective way to Spot the opinion
leaders for the innovation is to ask-ten farmers at
random who they would consult with regard to the particular
innovation. The men most frequently named are the opinion
leaders. Then attempt to get these men to carry out a

demonstration on the innovation.

78

Another type of volunteer communicators might be
identified as traveling communicators. These men are the
itinerant traders, migrant laborers or herdsmen, truck and
bus drivers, musicians, etc. These pe0ple are constantly
tranSplanting ideas. Their credibility is usually not
high, but they often fortify an idea by claiming to have
seen the successful use of the innovation in a number of
other locations. Many of these men are the foreign
version of Johnny Appleseed. Through this group of
communicators. the word Spreads extremely fast over vast
areas. In the early implementation stages it would be
well to use the audio/visual mobile units in strategically
located market places and overnight truck and bus stops

to gain the assistance of the traveling communicators.

The Effect of Cultural Patterns

 

To be effective a change agent must be an accepted
member of the culture in which he is working. Professional
change agents should be residents bf their assigned areas.
Most cultures look upon anyone from outside their group
or sub-group as an outsider who is not to be trusted.

In chapter four, we discussed the need to have the
major aSpects of planning, other than economic, done by
planners of the host country. This was to insure that

the norms prevalent in the country would be honored. Now

79

we are looking at values and attitudes as they pertain to
the cultural pattern. Values change from area to area
and even village to village. Attitudes change constantly
in all locations.

This promptisogers to say that (14, P. 57), "If we
know what a society's culture is, including its particular
system of values and attitudes, we can predict with a
fairly high degree of probability whether the bulk of its

members will welcome or resist a particular innovation."

CHAPTER 7
PRODUCTION FACTORS LEADING TO ADOPTION

Adoption of the innovation by the majority of the
farmers who produce a particular agricultural commodity is
the sole purpose of this entire presentation. Measurement
of success or failure can be made in several ways. The
economists measure the increase in total production and
the not benefit to the economy as a whole. Agricultural—
ists measure the increased yield and net profit per acre.
Politicians measure the apparent attitude of their influen-
tial constituents. Businessmen measure the amount of
their product sold as a result of the innovation. The
consumer measures the quality and price of the product in
the store: however, the best yardstick for success of the
entire process of implementation of an agricultural innova-
tion is the number of farmers adopting the innovation on
a permanent basis.

AS evidenced by the Congressional Hearing on The
Green Revolution (17), most of the evaluations published
on the ”Green Revolution" record its success in terms of
acres planted, increase in total production, amount of
new seed planted, increased fertilizer consumption, and

ability to feed a growing population. Few, if any, evaluations

80

81

measure the number of farmers using the innovation.
Reports of an even wider gap developing between peasant
farmers and wealthy farmers in terms of income, standard
of living and development potential substantiate this.
Throughout this paper the average farmer has been
stressed. Implementation of an innovation must be
geared toward adoption by the average farmer. The wealthy
and innovative farmer will readily adopt an innovation
of benefit to him without undue effort from the change
agent. The production problem is not so much how to
encourage total production increases through use of the
new innovation as it is one of how to get the average

farmer to adapt the new innovation.

The Farm Family

The basic production unit for agricultural products
is the farm family. Implementation efforts for a new
innovation must all be channeled into the utilization of
the many inputs by the farm family. These people are
far more than merely a labor force. They are the managers,
the economists, the evaluators and the producers of the
agricultural sector of the country. The decisions made
by the farm families, right or wrong, determine the
future development of most IDCS.

Planners would be advised to keep in mind throughout

the entire implementation process_the reaction each

82

decision will have on the farm family. Planners should
have empathy with the farm family. What may appear irra-
tional to the planner and foreign adviser, may be entirely
rational for farm families in their environment. Successful
implementation of an innovation requires recognition of
environmental blockades. Corrections to the environmental
climate to permit adoption of the innovation are necessary.
This is not a problem of input availability but one of

a set of values and attitudes of the farmer, his land
tenure situation, his level of comprehension and the
existing social and cultural pressures.

The adaption of any new innovation upsets the farmer's
list of priorities. The farm family evaluates a new
innovation in terms of whether they are willing to alter
their priorities to the extent necessary to accommodate
a new innovation. For example, they must decide whether
to use their meager savings to purchase seed and fertilizer
or to use the money for clothing as planned, or to sell
some of their sheep to obtain the money. In any case, the
reaction within the farm family is according to the domino
theory: One change causes changes in the whole. Farm
families recognize this which may explain why they are
often reluctant to accept a new innovation no matter how

advantageous it may be. Some farmers may initially adapt

83

a new innovation only to drop it later when these many
emerging problems appear not to be worth the changes
necessary in farm operation. At this point the village
change agent can help by encouraging the farmer to see more

clearly how these changes can easily be made.

The Land Situation

 

Farmer reaction to new innovations often can be
negative because of a lack of security or ownership of
the land. If the farmer is a tenant and does not know from
one year to the next if he will be farming the same piece
of land, he will be reluctant to make any investment that
remains in the soil. Sometimes the farmer who owns the
land knows that if his land becomes more fertile his cred-
itors will foreclose. Farmers in most LDCS look upon
control of the land as their control over their income and
security. Farmers with control of their land are more
apt to adopt new innovations than those with little or

no control over the land they are farming.

Prevailing Level of Knowledge

 

We often think of knowledge and literacy as having
a high correlation. This is not necessarily true. Formal
education and literacy have a high correlation but

knowledge is also acquired through a series of experiences.

84

The poorest illiterate peasant farmer possesses consid-
erable knowledge about some subjects - usually those
subjects having to do with nature.

For the purpose of implementing an innovation, the
planners should ascertain the prevailing level of know-
ledge of the farmers in the area of the new innovation.

An innovation should not be attempted if its implementation
requires technical comprehension far above the level of the
farmer. There are adaptations that can be applied to

highly technical information to make it understandable for

the peasant farmer. Often these adaptions require a compromise
on the part of research pe0ple in regard to optimum yield.
Extension staff should be alert to this situation and take

the initiative in negotiating a compromise in the recommen-

dations with the research people.

Influence of Incentives for Adaption

The most effective method to accelerate the rate of
adoption of a new innovation is the judicious use of
incentives. Incentives are of various types such as
production incentives, price support, need for material
goods and social prestige. These factors, when used
properly, are powerful forces for encouraging farmers to
adopt new innovations.

In Chapter Four, we discussed price incentives for

agricultural inputs. Several additional incentive factors

85

are at work in the village. In all societies the wife

has considerable influence over decisions regarding

new innovations. She can be the driving force behind
adoption as is dramatically shown in the movie “A Future
for Ram“ (17, P. 163). Through her exposure to moderni-
zation she may push her husband to earn the extra money
for a sewing machine. Home economics and rural sanitation
programs are often indirect influences on adoption of
agricultural innovations.

Prestige is a powerful incentive in the village.

A man who is considered a "progressive farmer" by virtue
of his successful use of new innovations is generally
well reSpected by his fellow farmers.

Farmers react positively to economic incentives
unless cultural or social constraints inhibitthem. 'Wharton
states (18, P. 6), ”The evidence is quite clear that,
given a favorable economizing setting, subsistence man is
highly reSponsive to the Opportunity for a larger income
(higher gain beyond costs and effort Spent)."

Social Pressures on the Adapters

 

There are both positive and negative social pressures
brought to bear on those innovative farmers who are the
first to adopt new innovations. Village people laugh at
a farmer who would Sprinkle sugar (fertilizer) on his land.
Outright hostility sometimes breaks out when the village

86

elders feel the good and stable life is threatened by
outside influences they cannot control.

Often the innovative farmer is not free to try out
the new agricultural innovations on his land for he
knows full well the consequenses. This presents the
problem for the change agent of how to approach the
village people with a new innovation. There is no general
answer, for each village in each country presents a
little different situation. A few points to consider
are: 1) determine the norms and values of the people
and present the innovation in such a manner that there
will be no confrontation, 2) approach the village leaders,
first individually and then collectively, to gain their
endorsement and support, 3) consult with opinion leaders
and encourage them to try the new innovation, 4) hold an
open village meeting where village leaders and opinion
leaders publicly voice their approval for the innovation.
If these four points are successful, the change agent has
turned what might have been negative social pressures into

positive social pressure in support of the innovation.

Difficulpy of Methodolpgy

The majority of farmers in LDCS do most of their
farming by hand on small plots of land. Many of the
new innovations are discovered on experiment stations

using highly mechanized methods of production. As a

87

result, many of the recommended practices for the new
innovations have very precise instructions for production:
for example, precise depth of planting the seed, exact
placement of fertilizer, and detailed instructions on how
to spray the crap are given. This type of recommendation
presumes the farmer who will use the recommendations will
have available to him the same or similar equipment. This
is one of the contributing factors for the wealthy innovative
farmer to have the advantage over the average farmer.

This situation need not exist if the change agents
are innovative themselves. Extension specialists can
adapt the recommendations to the farm machinery the farmer
has at his disposal. Placement of phosphate fertilizer two
inches below the seed at planting time is an example. For
a hand farmer to do this would be impossible: however,
if he is ridge farming (listing) and he normally plows by
splitting the old ridge by hand to form a new ridge in
the old furrow, he could broadcast his phosphate in the
old furrow prior to ridge splitting and accomplish about the
same thing as the machine planter with a fertilizer attach-
ment. The hand farmer carries on with his hand planting
on the new ridge as always. The only change from his trad-
itional method is broadcasting phosphate fertilizer in the
old furrows before plowing. If the methodology is simplified

to nearly meet research specifications and still not

88

cause too great a change in the normal farming procedure,
the innovation will meet with far more acceptance by the
average farmer.

If research recommends #1 pounds of nitrogen
mechanically spread over one acre, is it not possible that
35 to #5 pounds hand broadcast over an acre would give
almost the same results? Of course, Optimum results
cannot be achieved with hand farming, but why is it that
maximum yield plots throughout the world all involve a
high degree of hand labor?

Investment Reggirements

 

Simplification of implementation recommendations
can often reduce the investment requirements substantially.
About the only manner to obtain universal acceptance of
a new innovation is to require very little investment of
additional labor, money or management ability. If the
innovation can be so designed as to require only those raw
material inputs such as seed and fertilizer, the farmer
will more readily adopt the practice.

In most LDCs the cost of the raw material inputs
are subsidized in the beginning stages of introduction.
The subsidy is planned to be reduced gradually as soon as
farmer response is evident; however, politicians are
often reluctant to reduce the subsidy for fear of a nega-

tive rural reaction. They are later forced to make an

89

abrupt reduction in subsidy because of a drain on the
treasury from the high volume of sales. Subsidies should

be used with caution and a firm policy.

The Adoption Process

 

In this chapter we have been looking at some of the
factors leading toward adaption. Now we shall look at the
stages each farmer passes through in the process of adapting
a new innovation.

Rogers' concept of the adoption process (13, P. 81)
involves five stages: 1) awareness, 2) interest, 3) evalu-
ation, h) trial and 5) adoption. The most critical evalu-
ation of a new innovation, however, comes after the trial
and before actual adoption. Without a satisfactory
evaluation after the trial stage, adoption will never take
place. Therefore, let us consider the adoption process
as a six-stage process including ”re-evaluation" after
the trial stage.

In the awareness or exposure stage the individual
hears of the innovation but lacks much of the information
concerning the innovation. Mass media are very effective
at this stage.

At the interest stage the farmer is curious and
begins looking for information concerning the innovation.
The change agent and certain of the media are involved at

this stage. Radio and mobile audio/visual units help

90

project this information to the farmer. If additional
information concerning the innovation is not readily
available, the farmer will probably forget the idea.

Evaluation of the innovation in terms of the individ-
ual's situation is automatically the next stage of the
adoption process. It is at this stage that the farmer
decides whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
He then decides whether or not to try it. Again, the change
agent can be of assistance helping the farmer recognize the
advantages and disadvantages, but the final decision is a
personal matter.

The trial stage is a validity test for the farmer's
decision that the innovation is advantageous for him. He
carries out the innovation on a small scale for this test.
The change agent can be very helpful here by offering a
demonstration opportunity to the farmer during the initiation
phase. Thereafter the farmer would have to find his own
materials for his trial.

Re-evaluation comes after the validity test or trial.
If the innovation was satisfactory in the trial stage the
farmer's re-evaluation would cause him to seek the means to
adOpt the innovation permanently on his farm. .Availability
of the necessary inputs and possibly credit for their purchase
are crucial at this stage.

In the adoption stage the new innovation is completely

absorbed into the farming system. This does not necessarily

91

mean that, for instance, 100 percent of the wheat or rice
will be of the new variety. Traditionally most farmers
raise more than one variety for filling Special needs. It
does mean that the farmer has accepted the new innovation
on a permanent basis.

The rate of adaption varies with the individual, his
motivation, social awareness and economic situation. Some
individuals will move rapidly through the six stages of
adoption while others will remain at the awareness stage
indefinitely.

Rogers (13, P. 110) places adopters into several cate-
gories: the innovators, the early adopters, the early majority,
the late majority, and the laggards. Another category consists
of non-adopters. An innovation is seldom adOpted 100 per-
cent. It is difficult to assign a percentage of the farmers
to each category because of wide variations in the innovations
themselves. A rule of thumb might be: innovators, 2 to 5
percent; early adopters, 10 to 15 percent; early majority,

25 to 40 percent; late majority, 30 to 50 percent; laggards,

10 to 30 percent. Those involved in implementing an innova—
tion should continue to participate actively into the early
majority category. In this category the change agents,
research people and some of the planners ease out of the
picture and the input suppliers and marketing pe0ple accelerate
their activity. The late majority and the laggards will
eventually adapt the innovation without further effort.

CHAPTER 8
MARKETING -- PURCHASE AND DISTRIBUTION

A ready market for the agricultural commodity that
the innovation produces is vital to the continued produc-
tion of the commodity. Mosher (8, p.63) considers ready
markets the first essential for development. Rapidly
expanded production of the commodity requires an equally
rapid expansion of the marketing facilities. Traditional
marketing systems in most LDCs are not capable of eXpansion
at the rapid rate needed to facilitate the handling of a
large increase in total production. Planners should ana-
lyze the total marketing system and determine the probable
bottlenecks. In most cases, several of the steps a commo-
dity passes through could be eliminated without any measure-
able change in flow of the commodity in the marketing system.

Most LDCs have made tremendous strides in improvement
of transportation and storage of agricultural commodities;
however, in most cases these developments have merely been
absorbed into the traditional marketing system. The "Green
Revolution" is forcing many LDCs to alter their traditional
system to accommodate a rapid increase in production. Many

of these alterations are of a "stOp-gap" nature and contain

many weaknesses.

92

93

The anticipation of ”second generation” problems was
discussed in Chapter Four. Marketing is one of the major
second generation problems. Planning in anticipation of
marketing the increased production should concentrate on
both the purchase of the commodity from the farmer and the
distribution and handling of the commodity after purchase.
Three main areas of purchasing are: the buying system,

the quality control standards, and the price fixing system.

The Buying System

Traditional buying systems fall into two main cate-
gories: that where the farmer delivers his commodity to
the buying point and that where a buyer comes to the farmer
and purchases the commodity. The realized price to the
farmer is usually far less when the buyer comes to the
farmer. Farmers who do not frequent the market place are
not informed about the current price and often accept far
less than the going price from the traveling buyer.

The location of the farmer in reference to the buying
station permits the services of an intermediate buyer.
Planners should explore the possibility of expanding the
number of buying stations so that all major producing
localities are served by at least one convenient buying

station.

Quality Qontrol Standards

Over the years, buyers have taken advantage of farmers

94

by claiming the quality of the product is low when in
actual fact it is not. Few LDCs have an effective quality
control standard that is respected by the buyers and under—
stood by the farmers. Many LDCs have established quality
standards but there is no enforcement nor educational
program to acquaint farmers and buyers of those standards.
Agricultural commodities for export are usually inspected
for quality prior to export: however, this inspection usu-
ally takes place in the assembly area and the shrewd buyer
is one who makes a profit from a high quality product,

not the farmer.

When large increases in production take place, the
quality control system usually breaks down. The product is
dumped into large ”field run” piles, and farmers are not
paid for quality but for quantity only. A corps of well-
trained government grade inspectors strategically located
would help alleviate this problem; however, the greatest
assistance to the acceptance of quality control standards
would be a concentrated educational campaign aimed at

farmers and buyers alike.

Price Fixing System

In order to effect an equitable price fixing system
a universally accepted money system and a standard set of

weights and measures must be adopted. In the rural areas

95

of many IDCs. farmers still use the barter system and
stones of various sizes are used for weights. In some
areas volume measure is a local quantity and differs from
one locality to another. This confusing state of affairs
allows the shrewd trader to offer short weights and volume
to farmers without their realizing it. Standard price
fixing under these circumstances is extremely difficult.
For this reason the system of bargaining has been establish-
ed for hundreds of years. Planners should consider a gov-
ernment established, universal money system and standard
weights and measures as a first requisite for development
in rural areas.

Price ceilings and floors are price fixing techniques
so complex in nature that few LDCs should consider their
use. Where they are successful, a virtual governmental
monOpoly exists, and in most cases the farmer is receiving
less than he might in a free market situation. The most
common price fixing situation is where government marketing
boards buy from the farmer, grade the commodity, trans-
port it to the nearest port and sell it abroad. In Nigeria
(6, p. 20), marketing boards were successful until they
fell into the hands of the politicians.

Price fixing in most DDCs follows a fluctuating pat-
tern of supply and demand. Farmers respond positively to

these fluctuations, but their response is reflected one year

96

after the fluctuation. Behrman concludes (1, p. zuO),
”The results of this study suggest that the government
should avoid introducing distortions into the relative
prices of products and factors because peasants do respond
significantly to the existing price structure. In the un-
likely event that government has sufficient information to
stabilize market prices without incurring great costs in
storage or in other activities...medium-term stabilization

may be desirable."

Distribution and Handling

Transportation, storage, handling and distribution
of agricultural commodities are primarily in private hands.
Governments generally provide assistance, encouragements,
and a certain degree of control over the private sector
in this area.

The greatest encouragement to transportation in most
LDCs is the construction of a network of all-weather roads
plus a complementary network of secondary ”farm-to-market"
roads. Government has the sole responsibility for road
construction, and it is a very expensive undertaking. From
an economic standpoint, the road network should first be
built in the most productive agricultural area. ‘When that
network is completed, roads should be built in the neXt

most productive area. Unfortunately, politics often over-

97

over-ride economic feasibility and many LDCs exhaust con-
struction funds on "political roads” before the highly pro-
ductive areas have roads.

Planners should take Special note of the existing
road situation in the areas where the innovation would be
implemented to ascertain whether the additional product
could be easily transported to market. Seasonal variations
in rainfall sometimes cause farm-to-market roads to be
closed for several months at a time when the commodity
should be moved out of the growing area. ’

Most LDCs suffer from lack of suitable storage for
agricultural commodities. The lack of on-the-farm storage
forces farmers to sell at harvest time only to have to buy
later in the year at a higher price because their quantity
stored at home is exhausted. In years of bumper crops some
LDCs, like Iran in 1968, are forced to export at harvest
time because storage facilities cannot hold the entire har-
vest. When planning for a new innovation both the on-farm
storage and central storage should be considered. Special
consideration should be given to insect control in storage.

Handling of perishable commodities requires a large
investment in either packaging or processing. All agricul-
tural commodities are perishable to a certain extent, but
those with a short usability time span are extremely diffi-

cult to handle. Each commodity has its special requirements

98

and to market it rapidly in peak of condition requires a
marketing system few LDCs have at the present.

Distribution of agricultural commodities to those
areas of short supply and relatively high demand requires
first a good communication system and secondly the trans~
portation and storage facilities to move the product quickly.
Coordination is the most difficult part of distribution.

Not only must internal coordination take place at the local
and provincial level, but it also must take place between
provinces and regions of the country. The nerve center for
the distribution system is usually in the capital city where
the main coordination between provinces and regions as well
as export quantities is determined. How capably the coor-
dinators function is very important to the entire distribu-
tion system. Lack of a market intelligence service can pre-
vent coordination and present a situation where an extreme
shortage exists in one part of the country while a large
surplus in the same commodity exists elsewhere.

In summary, Brown states (2, p.90) concerning the new
”Seeds of Change" that ”Governments in the poor countries...
must address marketing with a sense of urgency matching that
required to achieve the explosive grains in food production.
Without such an effort, many of the potential gains may

evaporate."

CHAPTER 9
DISPOSITION OF THE COMMODITY

All agricultural commodities are produced to meet
the needs of the ultimate consumer. The quality, quantity
available, the price, the taste and the appearance of the
product determine the consumer reaction. Consumer pre- ‘
ferences are important. There is nobody more particular
than the one who purchases the food for the household.
When farmers sell their produce it must meet the rigid
standards set by the customs of the society. This fact
is so well understood that farmers will keep the lOwer
quality food for their home consumption and sell the pre-
mium quality produce.

In the early stages Of the development of an innova-
tion, the product should be given a consumer preference
test. A palatability test alone is not enough. It must
also be tested for appearance, quality and general pre-
ference. The consumer preference testing should be done
in all representative areas of the country. If the product
is to be exported, sample shipments should be made to all
prospective buyers.

A strong consumer demand for the agricultural

commodity will insure a ready market. 1'he projected

99

100

population explosion predicts a continuing steady demand
for almost all types of foodstuffs produced. The major
problem appears to be to present the agricultural products
to the consumer at a price he is able to pay.

Planners should ascertain, in addition to consumer
preference, the amount of the product that would be con-
sumed locally, regionally, nationally and the eXpected

amount that could be exported.

Local Consumption

Those agricultural products that can be consumed
locally are primarily the food and fiber crops. The
farm family usually consumes about half or more Of the
food crap produced, eSpecially if it is the staple food.
If it is a specialty crop, family consumption would be
considerably less. As the quantity of food produced in-
creases, the amount consumed by the family will increase
only slightly. Additional locally produced food will be
utilized by non-agriculturalists in the village and nearby
town. Normally, local distribution of agricultural pro-
ducts Of all types to local consumers is no problem. The
problem that arises is how to determine in advance the local
surplus available for shipment outside the local area.
Planners should be sure to figure an ample amount to re-
main in local storage to guard against any future unfore-
seen shortage in production. The actual figure

101

available as surplus to the local area is never known until

the total harvest is in and local sales completed.

Rggional and National Consumption

After satisfying local consumption requirements,
the surplus agricultural commodities are shipped to the
regional cities. Consumers in the cities of the region
generally have the same preferences for foodstuffs as
their rural neighbors. Normally no consumer bias is evi-
dent within a regional area, but often there are different
consumer preferences between regions of a country. If
there is a different consumer preference for the agricul—
tural product produced by the innovation, planners should
be aware of this. Shipment of the produce into a region
that prefers a different type or variety will cause mar—
keting problems and tie up storage facilities.

Normally the flow Of surplus agricultural production
from the local areas will go in the direction of the
larger town adjacent to the local area until consumer re-
quirements are met. Then the surplus of that town is sent
tO the nearest next larger town to meet their needs. Finally,
when the needs Of the consumers in all the towns and cities
have been met, the region will declare any regional sur-

pluses available for transfer outside the region. Food

shortages have been experienced in most LDCs and each

102

region will make sure that there is sufficient food for

its pOpulation before allowing any export of food outside
the regional boundry. The same situation exists for export
Of food outside the country.

The flow of agricultural production as described
above gives partial explanation Of why, in years of short
food supply, the larger cities in the LDC show the first
signs Of shortage and usually suffer the most. Equitable
distribution Of food supplies is a difficult problem.
Planners should devise methods adapted to each country's
situation to insure equitable food distribution through-
Out the country. One possibility would be to enforce a
rule that for each load Of food leaving a local community
for nearby towns another load be sent to the large cities.
This would start an earlier flow Of relatively cheaper
harvest time food toward the cities. Prices have much to
do with distribution of food. Generally food prices are
higher in the cities than elsewhere in order to draw ship-
ments away from small town destinations. This causes the
general cost of living to be higher in the cities. It is
a challenging problem for planners to organize a system that
will put foodstuffs into the hands of city laborers at a
price equitable with that of his rural brothers.

103

International Export of the Commodity

 

If the agricultural innovation is connected with a
product grown entirely for export in the raw state, it is
a relatively simple matter to eXpedite. The main problem
is competition on the world market, with regard tO both
price and quality. An ever increasing number Of LDCs
are establishing processing plants for export commodities
in an attempt to gain a larger share of the product's value
for the producing country. Many export commodities enjoy
a much larger world market with the product at least par-
tially processed.

The advent of the ”Green Revolution” has changed the
entire picture for those countries who traditionally ex-
ported fOOd grains. Many of the grain deficit countries
are now becoming self-sufficient in staple food grains,
and wheat and rice are fast moving into a surplus on the
world market. Already planners are looking for alternate
uses for food grains and substitute crOps to grow in place
of rice and wheat. Planners would be advised to carefully
explore the world market situation Of the agricultural
product before embarking on implementation Of an innova-
tion in cereal grain production.

Looking into the future, Brown (2, p. 12) summarizes
the situation as follows, ”A crisis in the world grain

market is imminent because the food-production breakthroughs

104

are occuring just as Europe and Japan are pursuing highly
protectionist agricultural policies. The stage is now set
for a major confrontation between the rich and poor countries
over how to rationalize world agricultural trade. The
pivotal question is whether the rich countries that do not
have a comparative advantage in cereals are prepared to open
their internal markets to cereal exports from the poor

countries.”

CONCLUSION

The implementation process is the core of agricul-
tural development. An understanding of this complex and
dynamic processby agricultural advisers can accelerate
agricultural develOpment in the less~develOped cOuntries
Of the world. The technical agriculture advantages of
the more develOped countries can be transmitted if the
basic process of implementation is followed.

This paper is not intended to furnish the answer
to the problems Of implementation. If it serves as a tool
to stimulate innovative thinking in agricultural develOp-
ment, the author will have achieved his purpose. HOpe-
fully this paper may open doors to further searching and
researching on the details and refinement of the implemen-

tation process.

105

l.

B I B L I O G R A P H Y

Behrman, Jere R. ”The Economic Behavior of Subsistance
Farmers.” Supgigtance.Agpicplpure and Ecoppmic
Develo ment. Edited by Clifton R. Wharton, Jr.
Chicago: Zldine Publishing 00., 1969

Brown, Lester R. ”Seeds of Change”; The Green
Reyolution and Deyglopment in the 1920's. New York:

published for the Overseas Development Council by
Praeger, 1970.

Eicher, Carl, and'Witt, Lawrence. Aggiculture in

Economic Deyelgpment. New York: McGrawbHill Book
Ce. 9 e

. Research on.Agpicultural DevelOpment in
EIye English-Speakipg Couptries in West Africa.
New Yor : T 6 gr cultural.Deve opment Council,
Inc., 1970.
Esman, Milton J. "Institution-Building as a Guide
to Action.” Paper presented at the Conference on

Institution Building and Technical Assistance.
Washington, D.C. mimeo, December, 1969.

Lewis, W. Arthur. Bgflggtions 9n Nigeria's Egpngpic
Growth. Paris: published by the Development Center

of the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and
DevelOpment, 196?.

Mellor, John W. The Economics of.A icultural
Develo ment, IffiIca, New York: CornelI University
Press, 1966.

Mosher, Arthur T. Gettin A iculture Movi : Essentials
for DevelOpment and Modernigation. New York:

published for the Agr cu tural.Development Council
by Praeger, 1966.

Myrdal, Gunnar. Asian Drama: An Inquiry Into the
P er Of Nat one. New York: Pantheon, div sion

Of Random House, 1968.

106

10.

11.

12.

13.

1b.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

Pearson, Lester B.

Partners in Development. Report

 

of the Commission oflmIfiternationaI’Development,
L.B. Pearson, Chairman. New York: Praeger, 1969.

Ramsay, George W.

Annual Report to USAID Mission to

Nigeria. Lagos, Nigeria: 1966.

Rogers, Everett M.

Class Notes: Communication 828.

Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1970.

, and Shoemaker, F. Floyd. Communication Of
Innovations: A Cross-Cultural A raoch. New York:
fn-process-of prIntIng By Free Press of Glencoe, 1970.

, Diffusion of Innovations. New York: The
Free Press, 1962.

________J Modernization Among Peasants: The Impact
of Communication. New York: HO t, Rine ar an

Winston, Inc.,

969.

Schultz, Theodore W. Transformin Traditional A i-
ppltuzg. New Haven, ConnectIcu%: YaIe UnIversIty

Press, 196k.
Spicer, Edward H.

human Eygblgms in Technological
‘Qhange. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 19 2.
Symposium on Science and Foreign Policy, "The Green
Revolution.” Proceedings before the Subcommittee
on National Security Policy and Scientific Devel-
opments Of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, House

of Re resentatives, Ninety-first Congress, December
5, l9 9. 'Washington,.D.C. U.S. Government Printing

Office, 1970.

Wharton, Clifton R. Jr. "Strategies for Rural Devel-
Opment'. Revision of paper originally given at
meeting of Southeast Asia DevelOpment Advisory Group,
April, 1966, Asia House, New York.

"The Green Revolution: CornucOpia or

Pandora's Box?”

Foreigp Affairs Magazine, Fall, 1969.

107

HICHIGQN STQTE UNIV. LIBRQRIES

||||| Wll |||||H|||| NIH {IIIHIII Hill
9 1

312 310413252