I.J.S.N., VOL. 3(1) 2012: 12-19 ISSN 2229 – 6441

12

Review Article

STUDY OF ROLE OF AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION IN THEDISSEMINATION OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT

1Jadalla.A.E.Omar, 1Abu Hassan Abu Bakar, 2Hasnah MD. Jais & 3Faisal Moftah Shalloof1School of Housing, Building& Planning, Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), 11800 Penang, Malaysia

2School of Biological Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), 11800 Penang, Malaysia3School of Agriculture Economics, University Omar Al-Mukhtar, Al- Beida Libya

ABSTRACTAchievement of a well organized extension system for efficient and effective extension delivery in all aspects ofsustainable agriculture and rural development to attain food security, poverty reduction, rural empowerment andenvironment management. In order to solve the Problems of rural development, Agricultural extension systems need toencourage the active participation of Farmers in planning, implementing, and monitoring Agricultural extension programs.To achieve this participation, extension organizations will need to formally decentralize and Pluralistically transfer thecontrol of specific program planning and management functions to the system levels of local Agricultural extension andPrivate sector organizations and Farmers organizations and Education organizations where extension programs areactually implemented.

KEYWORDS: - Decentralization, Pluralism, Sustainable Agricultural Development.

INTRODUCTIONSustainable agriculture, although a difficult term to defineoperationally, includes the practice of low inputagricultural production technologies, which attempts toensure the profitability of farms while preserving theenvironment. And from the market point of view, theseproducts obtained are sold at profitable prices whichwould provide incentives for farmers to adopt thenecessary methods (Niamh Dennehy et al., 2000). Inaddition, the farmers also need to be convinced thatachieving such production systems for future generationsis as crucial as, it is necessary to find a way to prioritizedifferent programs and goals and then allocate resourcestowards those goals (Kristi N. Hughes and Ledbetter,2009). It Provide efficient and effective need-basedextension services to all categories of farmers, to enablethem to optimize their use of resources, in order topromote sustainable agricultural and socioeconomicdevelopment (Hoque and Usami, 2007). There aredifficulties in the operation of public extension systemsand in the typical bureaucratic political environmentwithin which they are budgeted and managed. Theinability to service faulty equipment or acquire new ones,delay in the payment of salaries and allowances, embargoon recruitment of new staff and trainings, and infrequentpromotion exercise are other problems (Al Subaiee et al.,2005). Extension personnel perceived lack of funds toconduct timely research, inadequate transportation,resources of farmers, cost of inputs, and availability ofcredit as major constraints in technology transfer,inadequate supply of inputs, and inadequate coordinationwith development departments, banks, cooperatives and

other organizations (Rama Radhakrishna and Yoder,1996). The fiscal unsustainability is a generic problemthat affects many large-scale public agricultural extensionsystems (Witt et al., 2008). We define fiscal sustainabilityas the financial ability to maintain the extension effort at alevel that can realistically be expected to attain significantcoverage (directly or indirectly) of the farming populationnationwide (Quizon et al., 2001). Farmers were reluctantto take the “risk” of implementing new practices,technologies or skills; had small scattered plots of land,showed little interest in extension programs because theylack confidence in the extension officers, possessedinsufficient capital for inputs and little opportunity toacquire bank loans (Diamond, 2000). Agriculturalextension services is the bedrock of Agriculturaldevelopment, however, the development of the sectorcannot be achieved without an efficient and effectiveextension system. Thus, there is the need for a wellarticulated and comprehensive Agricultural ExtensionPolicy, Which depends on Decentralization and Pluralismto development of Agricultural extension system(Koyenikan,. 2008). Agricultural extension servicessystem is composed of a large number of varyingelements, but there are some commonly known serviceswhich are essential to Sustainable agriculturaldevelopment in spite of their various organizationalschemes and arrangements,. They include (Figure 1):agricultural research, agricultural extension, agriculturaleducation and farmer’s training centers, agricultural credit,marketing system for purchasing inputs and sellingagricultural produce, transport facilities, (Weitz, 1971,World Bank 1990, Umali 1994).

Role of agricultural extension in the sustainable agricultural development

13

FIGURE 1: Elements that contribute in the dissemination of sustainable agricultural development.Source, (Weitz, 1971, World Bank 1990, Umali 1994).

A review of research work studyAgricultural extension policy is a part of nationaldevelopment policy in general and of agricultural and ruraldevelopment policy in particular. Hence, the problems ofestablishing or maintaining an effective agriculturalextension service can be traced back to the lack of arealistic policy or an unstable policy framework forcharting of the extension system (Swanson et al., 1997). Indeveloping national agricultural extension policies,representatives of all major groups of farmers should bedirectly involved and other relevant agriculturalorganizations, should have a comprehensive agriculturalextension policy which provides for coordination withresearch and education. The most difficult and challengingpolicy issue facing extension today is to secure a stablesource of funding (Swanson et al., 1997).With thewidespread trend to cut government budgets, thereforePolicy makers should examine this issue carefully indeciding what level of public funding is necessary tosupport extension in relation to the needs of farmers in thecountry Policies are predetermined guides to decisionmaking; they establish boundaries or limits within whichaction may be taken. Many proposed instruments are notfinancially affordable within current budget allocations,even with greater efficiency in current spending,increasing the government budget allocations toagriculture will often be necessary (Farrington, 1995).Although it is hard to defend public funding of agriculturalextension if the benefit is only for the farmers who use thisservice. There are many situations where the public atlarge also profits from the extension services, and thisrequires large increases in current budget allocations and

innovative public-private partnerships to make theseinvestments (Van den Ban, 2000). In addition to creating anew management structure and hiring new employees, thisnew system had to arrange for new facilities such asoffices, equipment, transportation, and a communicationssystem (Burton E. Swanson and Rajalahti, 2010).Resources categorized into money, people, and time, havefound a significant relationship between the resources andproject implementation. They observed that havingsufficient funding, appropriate people and enough timehave had positive effects on a project’s outcome(Chapman and Tripp, 2003). A search for alternativefunding and delivering mechanisms is currently on and adecision on how to pursue these strategies (buildingpolitical support for cost-sharing of agro technologytransfer; establishment of farmers cooperative to serve asavenues for levy collection; enacting enabling legislationfor cost-sharing; and increasing the number of extensionstaff or reducing the area of coverage per extension staff)would depend on the type and quality of services madeavailable by various agencies at present (Chukwuone etal., 2006). Subsidiary refers to the operational authorityand responsibilities that are devolved to the lowestpossible level of authority, consistent with organizationalcompetencies and the efficient use of funds. Resourcesincluding funds, would be assigned to the grassroots levelbased on specific responsibilities, interested in and willingto shift the authority for providing extension services tofarmers’ associations, and moving towards shifting fiscalresponsibility to districts and sub-counties whiletransferring the rights to farmer associations to contract-out to private entities for extension services (Rivera et al.,

Marketing

Education

Transport

Agricultural

Inputs

Policy and

Planning

Credit

Extension

Research

Farmers

I.J.S.N., VOL. 3(1) 2012: 12-19 ISSN 2229 – 6441

14

2001). Agricultural extension can receive and expandproject funds, enter into contracts and agreements andmaintain revolving accounts that can be used to collectfees and thereby recovering operating costs (Van den Banand Wageningen, 2003). The fees collected could be apotential source of funds for Agricultural extension tomeet its declining operational funding (Van den Ban andWageningen, 2003). Improving the competitiveness offarmers by financing agricultural extension may be a moreeffective and less costly way. However, people mayrealize what they have to pay in taxes to financeagricultural extension, but not what they would pay ifimport duties on food products were raised (Van den Ban,2000). Fee-for-service Agricultural extension is providedfor by Agricultural extension management (or anothersector) and paid for by the farmers. Small groups offarmers usually contract the services. This arrangementallows farmers to “vote” on programs and program scaleby paying for them (Davis, 2008). In addition to providing

feedback, fee-for-service also can provide additionalsources of revenue to public extension, and privateextension recognizes that public money can be used tofund private activities, and that public services may benefitfrom private (cost-recovery) revenues (Chapman andTripp, 2003). Other measures include, increasing thenumber of extension staff or reducing the area of coverageby an extension agent and establishment of vibrant farmerscooperative to serve as avenue for collecting the chargesfrom farmers (Chukwuone et al., 2006). Therefore in orderfor cost-sharing to be effective, there should be enoughinformation dissemination including radio advertisementand stakeholders’ in different parts of the country tosensitize the public especially farmers on cost sharing(Chukwuone et al., 2006). The single most importantfeature of privatized extension systems is not a change inthe source of funds but rather a change in the nature ofincentives that drive information provision (Chapman andTripp, 2003).

FIGURE 2: Different relationship to the agricultural extension for the dissemination of sustainable agriculturaldevelopment.

Such changes certainly expand extension's ability toprovide solutions to a wide range of complex problemswhile reducing costs and maintaining quality (Chapman

and Tripp, 2003). Sustainable agricultural developmentprograms worldwide have recognized that localparticipation is the key to the sustainable transfer and long

Pluralism Decentralization

Participation indecision- makingResources provision

Services provision

Sustainableagricultural

development

AgriculturalExtension

Low levels ofmanagement

Multipleorganizations

Role of agricultural extension in the sustainable agricultural development

15

term adoption of new technologies and approaches.Interactive participation is the approach that facilitates thiskind of Sustainable agriculture programs (Toness, 2001).The main aim of the reorientation Agricultural extensionprograms was to encourage collaboration and integrationby extension, research, tertiary institutions, participation oflocal stakeholders (different categories of farmers, plusrepresentatives from private sector, rural banks,Agricultural organizations) and planning, andimplementation of Sustainable agricultural developmentprograms (Barrick et al., 2009). In addition to participationof field staff in program planning, they are givenresponsibility for developing their own work plans andtraining programs and have representatives on themanagement of agricultural extension. Hence the fieldstaff performance is expected to increase if they haveprogram planning competency, program implementationcompetency and program evaluation competency(Tiraieyari et al., 2010). Managers are related to policyformation in two ways. First, they play a crucial role inimplementing organizational policies that have beenestablished by higher management. Second, they createpolicies within their departments as guides for their ownwork groups (Swanson et al., 1997). To achieve theselinkages need to restructure with new expertise andskills and with a new set of decentralization procedures,which are less hierarchical and more flexible, to respondto the emerging needs of farmers at the local level and toimprove the cooperation of cross of Pluralism extensionapproach among different government departments andother development agencies. (Figure 2)

Linking Decentralization of Agricultural ExtensionSystems to Sustainable agricultural developmentDeconcentration is defined as the transfer of effectivecontrol by central Managements to regional and provincialManagements or other field level offices. In addition, thisstrategy may include the participatory involvement offarmers in the managerial processes for agriculturaldevelopment (Rivera et al. 1997) . District extensiondirector received and followed instructions from the seniormanagement of the agricultural extension with limitedinvolvement of subordinate staff. The staff are involved inthe development of the case organization’s annualextension plan and each staff member is responsible inconsultation with his supervisor, for the development ofhis own annual work plan and training program. Two fieldstaff representatives are also included in a managementteam comprising the director and assistant, the supervisorsand a support staff representative (Okorley et al., 2009).Prior to decentralization, the management of the caseorganization was top-down - the decentralization is anexample of promoting the participation of lower-levels ofagricultural extension management in decision-makingand budgeting. And extension, participatory and demand-led services are examples of the effort to integrateproducers into agricultural processes (Niamh Dennehy etal., 2000), as this allows much greater transparency ofdecision making because the field staff representatives areinvolved in the actual decision making (Okorley et al.,2009). Decentralization also encourages more contact andopen communication to build respect and trust among the

staff, gives a level of flexibility to field staff to designtheir location-specific extension activities with farmers. Itencourages team work amongst the staff, and has openeditself up to increased scrutiny and input from farmers andother stakeholders through greater interaction with them(Okorley et al., 2009). This is undertaken to improve thefield staff’s knowledge of farmer practices and the reasonsbehind these practices to foster this learning culture. Thecase organization provides a range of mechanisms throughwhich staff can learn informally, such provides learningmaterials that the staff can access for self-directed learning(Okorley et al., 2009). It creates an open environment inwhich staff feel comfortable in sharing information, assuch this provides support to the field staff in decision-making, and encourages teamwork among the staff; andensures that the staff are informed in a timely fashionabout policies and other relevant issues (Okorley et al.,2009). The needed reforms include decentralization ofresponsibility, delegation of authority to district managersand teams, autonomy in routine decision making, and aseparate budget for operational expenditure. To adopt newtechnologies, solve problems, and increase income fromagriculture, must have to reorganize its structure andfunctions by embracing wider expertise, decentralizingmanagement, and nurturing a culture of organizationallearning (van den Ban and Wageningen, 2003). It shouldtake into consideration the diversity of organizations thatare providing different extension services and the potentialfor improving the relationships among them. Whileextension managers and policy makers need to explorethese options for providing better extension services tofarmers to meet the emerging challenges (van den Ban andWageningen, 2003). The technologies developed wereoften inappropriate for small-scale farmers, as theconditions on-farm, including the farmers’ ownmanagement type and priorities, were not adequatelyconsidered (Davis, 2008). Understanding of humanresource capacity building is a key factor of success fordecentralized public agricultural extension and otherinstitutions such as research institutes, universities andother government organizations to facilitate training. Thisproximity to major research institutions provides it with anadvantage in relation to accessing expertise for training(Okorley et al., 2009). The critical feature of field stafftraining at the case organization is the involvement offarmers in the training process, a practice they call “joint-training” exercise (Okorley et al., 2009). Institutionalreform has resulted in a variety of institutions beingengaged in the transfer and exchange of agriculturalinformation; as well as institutional reform throughprivatizing schemes such as contracting with the privatesector and the establishment of partnerships in theprovision of agricultural extension services (Kim et al.,2009). There is no way the private sector organizationscan effectively provide extension services without theassistance of the state and also from Agriculturaldevelopment organizations, because they already havewell-trained personnel and infrastructure in place. (KristinDavis and Place, 2003). Extension and research staff willbe accountable to farmer clients through the participationof farmer organizations and emerging agriculturalstructures in decision-making processes, and supported to

I.J.S.N., VOL. 3(1) 2012: 12-19 ISSN 2229 – 6441

16

ensure that they have a say in formulating policies thataffect them (Al-Rimawi and Al-Karablieh, 2002). Otherintervention measures include providing effectiveinformation dissemination to farmers, improvement intechnology delivery mechanisms and increasing outreachsuch as making technology component farmer specific.Others are decentralization of agricultural technologydelivery institutions, enhancing farmer’s managerialability especially through farmers’ organizations andeducational institutions and reforming agricultural marketsto stabilize income of farmers (Chukwuone et al., 2006).Consequently, an increase in the quality and quantity ofadult and continuing education programme is a priorityand educational institutions are charged with the task ofdesigning programme curricula to achieve these policyaims. Higher education today operates in a new era, an erathat is much more conscious of the market place(Angstreich and Zinnah, 2007). Towards this end, it isnecessary to review the potential of developing measuresfor the greater organizations when it comes to theagricultural extension organizations, design agriculturalextension organizations in the regions centered on the keyproducts, and various alternatives (Kim et al., 2009).

The Move towards Pluralism for Sustainableagricultural developmentAgricultural extension Managements can establish

different collaborative working relationships withAgricultural Development organizations based on trustand mutual respect, to obtain access to resources forextension delivery Farmers and staff training. (Ernest etal., 2010). The main challenge in installing a properpluralistic agricultural extension mechanism is theeffective coordination among various organizations,especially in matters of development when competentnonpublic institutions are present in the country (Riveraand Alex, 2004). The modality of using more than oneorganization, whether public or private, for deliveringextension services is to help in achieving the desired goals(Rivera and Alex, 2004). In addition, agricultural researchinstitutes, agricultural universities and farmers’associations, participate in the delivery of extensionservices. Here, agricultural extension refers to thecultivation of farmers’ organizations that aim to increaseagricultural productivity and to improve the everyday lifeof farmers. (Ban and Hawkins, 1988). The agriculturaltechnology distribution is a model which shows therelationship among agricultural research, agriculturalextension and farmers (Ban and Hawkins, 1988). Based onthe agricultural technology distribution, agriculturalextension process is a scientific knowledge the results ofagricultural research to the techniques and transmits thetechniques to the farmers to help them adopt thetechniques and increase production by using them (Kim etal., 2009). Agricultural research and technologyidentification are often relevant to all public and privateextension service providers. Here, most extension servicesoversight is an inherent aspect of the public sector’sresponsibilities for policy formulation, and design ofreforms to promote pluralistic extension institutionalarrangements (Rivera and Alex, 2004). The obviousrationale is the pooling of all available resources in order

to alleviate pressure from low budgets and staff in theministries of agriculture, as well as to let the farmersbenefit from a variety of sources (Rivera and Alex, 2004).But pluralistic extension also requires of emphasizingmultiple and diverse partnership between public andprivate sectors including partnership with farmerorganizations and private venture companies to facilitatethe common concepts, language, methods and skillsneeded to integrate the diversity that arises frominstitutional pluralism (Rivera and Alex, 2004). As farmerorganizations mature, they may become increasinglyoriented toward providing specific services for theirmembers (Burton E. Swanson and Rajalahti, 2010) . forexample, farmers’ associations have long played animportant role in providing advice on productiontechnologies ,and putting pressure on research andextension organizations to work in a more demand-drivenand client-oriented way (Van den Ban, 2000). The successof agricultural extension and development projects oftendepends on local participation, because this enable themto work as partners in planning and implementingagricultural and development programs. Extensionistsshould develop programs that facilitate the use of newtechnology to optimize this process and encourage farmersto use new technologies along with extension and otherorganizations (López and Bruening, 2002). Institutionalreorientation can be achieved by strengthening farmersorganizations to have a decisive role in determiningextension agendas, programs, and services throughcontracting, decentralization, and support to localinnovation (Rivera and Alex, 2004). The proposedorganizational linkage structure is intended to promotecooperation and coordination among developmentorganizations through involvement of the farmers, therebyproviding a more structured and permanent basis forinteraction between the organizations involved (Duvel,1996). The organizational linkage must have maintainedgood collaboration among agricultural extension andfarmers’ organizations, and provide support in training thefarmers and in the implementation of various agriculturalprojects (Kim et al., 2009). This structure is not intendedto be an alternative institutional framework for agriculturalextension that focus on the implementation ofdevelopment programs or projects; which usually consistsof top management, middle management, support staff andfield or site staff. It is visualized as a linkage structure orsystem with the purpose of linking developmentorganizations with the community in an effectivepartnership (Duvel, 1996). Another trend is the formationof agricultural organizations (which are less bureaucratic,more flexible and with wider expertise) to implementspecial programs related to agricultural development (vanden Ban and Wageningen, 2003). Farmer associations andproducer co-operatives are also presently involved inagricultural extension services, because they are the mosteffective in reaching farmers producing these crops andcommodities (van den Ban and Wageningen, 2003).Farmer organizations should therefore be a high priorityfor public sector extension, because farmers need a widerange of services related to technology (production andprocessing), quality, access to markets, price information,and business development, and improve the ability of

Role of agricultural extension in the sustainable agricultural development

17

farmers to collectively find solutions to their problems(van den Ban and Wageningen, 2003). Economic andsocial issues require the allocation of appropriate resourcesfor this work; this entails a commitment to developproficiency local groups to participate in these processes(Niamh Dennehy et al., 2000). Farmers belonging tofarmers organizations are more aware of the constraintsthey were facing to improve their production than non-members. This may be due to the fact that most extensionprogrammes were intended for farmers’ organizationsinstead of individual farmers (Owona Ndongo et al.,2010). The involvement of public organizations ininstitutional research and extension activities can leadthese institutions to establish complementary relationshipswith such organizations as the Agricultural ResearchInstitutes, the Ministry of Agriculture, and similaragricultural development organizations (Teffera Betru andHamdar, 1997). As the cost of research is high, the publicsystem is more technically and logistically equipped toundertake research activities, and the firms have directinterest to cooperate with the public research inundertaking experimental works (Al-Rimawi and Al-Karablieh, 2002). The provision of extension assistance tofarmers previously supported by participatingorganizations and the development of seed supplynetworks that are accessible and affordable to subsistencefarmers represent two tangible areas where linkagesbetween public and private extension activities couldprovide important benefits (Rodney Reynar et al., 1996).Development programs worldwide have recognized thatlocal participation is the key to sustainable transfer andlong-term adoption of new technologies and approaches.Interactive participation is the approach that facilitates thiskind of learning environment. Teaching has long been thenormal mode of educational programs and institutionswhere agricultural extension skills work (Toness, 2001).The capacity building component was designed aroundthree objectives: To develop competency-based curriculain participating universities that better match agriculturalsector workforce needs. To develop new and updatedcourses, and improve instruction; and to developinternship programs to provide real-life experiencesworking with farmers, exporters and other agribusinessfirms for college graduates (Barrick et al., 2009). In orderto move from a teaching paradigm towards a learningparadigm, highly participatory interactions and knowledgesharing among all sectors is critical for extensioninstitutions both in applied extension programs and atteaching institutions. Emphasizing the strengths of bothpublic and private extension initiatives may begin to fullyaddress the needs of subsistence farmers (Toness, 2001).A case is made for the organizations involved to continueto cross the institutional divides so that the long-termsustainability and development of small-scale farmingcommunities is ensured. Conventional station-basedapproaches to agricultural research, technologydevelopment, and extension have failed to achieve theexpected results in the small-scale farming sector of thedeveloping world (Davis, 2008).

Methodology

This paper is a review based on papers from Journals,Books, Conferences and Thesises

Conclusion and future work studyBased on this review paper for several studies, thefollowing conclusion was drawn and future work study aregiven, encourages more contact and open communicationto build respect and trust among the staff, gives a level offlexibility to field staff to design their location-specificextension activities with farmers and effectivecoordination among various organizations. Further andconcrete studies are needed because of complexity of theimpact evaluation; it is necessary to combine studies usingdifferent perspectives in order to increase the scope andrigor of results. If studies are coordinated (e.g.Contribution of decentralization and the Pluralism ofaccess to provides a framework for Agricultural extensionstaff to participate with farmers and other organizations infacilitating development planning and activityimplementation For sustainable agricultural development).

REFERENCESAl-Rimawi, A. & Al-Karablieh, E. (2002) AgriculturalPrivate Firms’ Willingness to Cooperate with PublicResearch and Extension in Jordan. Journal ofInternational Agricultural and Extension Education, 9, 5.

Al Subaiee, S., Yoder, E. & Thomson, J. (2005) Extensionagents' perceptions of sustainable agriculture in the RiyadhRegion of Saudi Arabia. Journal of InternationalAgricultural and Extension Education, 12, 5-14.

Angstreich, M. & Zinnah, M. (2007) A meeting of theminds: farmer, extensionist, and researcher. Journal ofInternational Agricultural and Extension Education, 14,85-95.

Ban, A. & Hawkins, H. (1988) Agricultural extension.

Barrick, R., Samy, M., Gunderson, M. & Thoron, A.(2009) A Model for Developing a Well-PreparedAgricultural Workforce in an International Setting.

Burton E. Swanson & Rajalahti, R. (2010) StrengtheningAgricultural Extension and Advisory Systems: Proceduresfor Assessing, Transforming, and Evaluating ExtensionSystems.

Chapman, R. & Tripp, R. (2003) Changing incentives foragricultural extension: A review of privatized extension inpractice.

Chukwuone, N., Agwu, A. & Ozor, N. (2006) Constraintsand strategies toward effective cost-sharing of agriculturaltechnology delivery in Nigeria: perception of farmers andagricultural extension personnel. Journal of InternationalAgricultural and Extension Education, 13.

Davis, K. (2008) Extension in sub-Saharan Africa:Overview and assessment of past and current models, andfuture prospects. Journal of International Agricultural andExtension Education, 15, 15-28.

I.J.S.N., VOL. 3(1) 2012: 12-19 ISSN 2229 – 6441

18

Diamond, J. E. (2000) Agricultural and ExtensionEducation in Albania. Journal of InternationalAgricultural and Extension Education, 7.

Duvel, G. (1996) Institutional Linkages For EffectiveCoordination And Cooperation In Participative RuralDevelopment. Journal of International Agricultural andExtension Education, 3, 76.

Ernest L. Okorley, David Gray and Janet Reid (2010)Towards A Cross-Sector Pluralistic Agricultural ExtensionSystem in A Decentralized Policy Context: A GhanaianCase Study. Journal of Sustainable Development in Africa, Volume 12, No.4, ISSN: 1520-5509

Farrington, J. (1995) The changing public role inagricultural extension. Food policy, 20, 537-544.

Hoque, M. & Usami, K. (2007) Effectiveness ofagricultural extension training courses for blocksupervisors at the Department of Agricultural Extension(DAE) in Bangladesh. Journal of InternationalAgricultural and Extension Education, 14, 51-59.

Kim, J., Kong, M. & Ju, D. (2009) Challenges in PublicAgricultural Extension of Korea. Journal of InternationalAgricultural and Extension Education, 16.

Koyenikan, M. J.(2008) Issues for Agricultural ExtensionPolicy in Nigeria. Journal of Agricultural Extension Vol.12

Kristin Davis & Place, N. T. (2003) Non-governmentalOrganizations as an Important Actor in AgriculturalExtension in a Semiarid East Africa. Journal ofInternational Agricultural and Extension Education, 10.

Kristi N. Hughes & Ledbetter, L. D. (2009) Creating anExternal Funding Strategy: How to Thrive. Journal ofExtension, 47.

López, J. & Bruening, T. (2002) Meeting EducationalNeeds of San Lázaro Farmers: Indigenous KnowledgeSystems. Journal of International Agricultural andExtension Education, 9, 39.

Niamh Dennehy, Dermot J. Ruane & Phelan, J. F. (2000)Supports and Funding for Community DevelopmentProjects in the Republic of Ireland. Journal ofInternational Agricultural and Extension Education, 7, 83.

Okorley, E., Gray, D. & Reid, J. (2009) ImprovingAgricultural Extension Human Resource Capacity in aDecentralized Policy Context: A Ghanaian Case Study.Journal of International Agricultural and ExtensionEducation. 2, 38

Owona Ndongo, P., Nyaka Ngobisa, A., Ehabe, E.,Chambon, B. & Bruneau, J. (2010) Assessment of trainingneeds of rubber farmers in the South-west region ofCameroon. 5, 2326-2331.

Quizon, J., Feder, G. & Murgai, R. (2001) Fiscalsustainability of agricultural extension: The case of thefarmer field school approach. Journal of InternationalAgricultural and Extension Education, 8, 13-24.

Rama Radhakrishna & Yoder, E. (1996) Constraints InTransfer Of Technology As Perceived By ExtensionPersonnel. Journal of International Agricultural andExtension Education, 3, 76.

Rivera, W. M., Elshafie, E. M. & Aboul - Seoud, K. H.(1997) The Public Sector Agricultural Extension Systemin Egypt: A Pluralistic Complex in Transition, Volume 4,Number 3. Journal of International agricultural andExtension Education,4.56

Rivera, W. & Alex, G. (2004) The continuing role ofgovernment in pluralistic extension systems. Journal ofInternational Agricultural and Extension Education, 11,41–52.

Rivera, W., Qamar, M. & Van Crowder, L. (2001)Agricultural and rural extension worldwide: options forinstitutional reform in the developing countries. FAOAbout CAB Abstracts CAB Abstracts is a unique andinformative resource covering everything from Agricultureto Entomology to Public Health.

Rodney Reynar, Fred Musser & Bruening, T. (1996) ThePotential For Linking Private And Public ExtensionServices In Bangladesh. Journal of InternationalAgricultural and Extension Education, 3, 76.

Swanson, B. E., Bentz, R. P. & Sofranko, A. J. (Eds.)(1997) Improving agricultural extension: A referncemanual, Food and Agriculture Organization of the UnitedNations Rome.

Teffera Betru & Hamdar, B. (1997) Strengthening TheLinkages Between Research And Extension InAgricultural Higher Education Institutions In DevelopingCountries. International Educational Development, 17,303-311.

Tiraieyari, N., Idris, K., Hamzah, A. & Uli, J. (2010)Importance of Program Development Competencies forAgricultural Extension Agents’ Performance in Process ofTechnology Transfer. American Journal of Agriculturaland Biological Sciences, 5, 376-379.

Toness, A. (2001) The potential of Participatory RuralAppraisal (PRA) approaches and methods for agriculturalextension and development in 21st century. Journal ofInternational Agriculture and Extension Education, 8, 25-37.

Umali, D. L. and L. Schwartz (1994), “Public and PrivateAgricultural Extension: Beyond Traditional Frontiers.”World Bank Discussion Paper No. 236. The World Bank:Washington, D. C.

Role of agricultural extension in the sustainable agricultural development

19

Van Den Ban, A. (2000) Different ways of financingagricultural extension. AgREN Network Paper, 106, 8-19.

Van Den Ban, A. & Wageningen, N. (2003) Funding andDelivering Agricultural Extension in India RasheedSulaiman V. Journal of International Agricultural andExtension Education, 10, 21.

Van Den Ban, A. (2000) Different ways of financingagricultural extension. AgREN Network Paper, 106, 8-19.

Weitz, R. (1971) From Peasant to Farmer: ARevolutionary Strategy for Development. (New York:Columbia State University Press).

Witt, R., Pemsl, D. & Waibel, H. (2008) The farmer fieldschool Senegal: does training intensity affect the diffusionof information. J. Int. Agriculture and ExtensionEducation, 15, 47-60.

World Bank (1990) Agricultural Extension: The NextStep. World Bank Policy Paper. The World Bank:Washington, D. C.