TY - JOUR

T1 - Transforming top-down agricultural extension to a participatory system

T2 - A study of costs and prospective benefits in Egypt

AU - Fleischer, Gerd

AU - Waibel, Hermann

AU - Walter-Echols, Gerd

PY - 2002/10/9

Y1 - 2002/10/9

N2 - This article challenges some previous assessments of agricultural extension relying on simple measures of costs per farmer trained. Taking the case of Egypt, five pilot projects that aim to transform the existing agricultural extension system to a participatory system are analysed as regards their cost-effectiveness and prospective cost-benefits. It is shown that the intensity and likely impact of participatory approaches among the different projects vary. Hence, it is insufficient to judge extension programmes by their cost-effectiveness alone. In the case of cotton, for example, the costs per farmer trained are considerably lower than in horticultural crops but there are large differences in prospective benefits which would make investment in participatory extension in the latter more promising. The article calls for a more careful analysis of the costs of extension programmes in agricultural development and identifies four major cost categories, namely base costs, start-up costs, recurrent and farmers' costs. The article also submits that in the context of the debate on privatization of agricultural extension there is a role to be played for the public sector in agriculture. The success of participatory approaches to extension will depend on the quality of services provided in connection with farmer training programmes.

AB - This article challenges some previous assessments of agricultural extension relying on simple measures of costs per farmer trained. Taking the case of Egypt, five pilot projects that aim to transform the existing agricultural extension system to a participatory system are analysed as regards their cost-effectiveness and prospective cost-benefits. It is shown that the intensity and likely impact of participatory approaches among the different projects vary. Hence, it is insufficient to judge extension programmes by their cost-effectiveness alone. In the case of cotton, for example, the costs per farmer trained are considerably lower than in horticultural crops but there are large differences in prospective benefits which would make investment in participatory extension in the latter more promising. The article calls for a more careful analysis of the costs of extension programmes in agricultural development and identifies four major cost categories, namely base costs, start-up costs, recurrent and farmers' costs. The article also submits that in the context of the debate on privatization of agricultural extension there is a role to be played for the public sector in agriculture. The success of participatory approaches to extension will depend on the quality of services provided in connection with farmer training programmes.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036774061&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/pad.233

DO - 10.1002/pad.233

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0036774061

VL - 22

SP - 309

EP - 322

JO - Public Administration and Development

JF - Public Administration and Development

SN - 0271-2075

IS - 4

ER -