Value of the Grower Group networks in the agricultural extension - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1

Stimulating private sector extension in Australian agriculture to increase returns from R&D

A/Prof Ruth Nettle Leader, Rural Innovation Research Group, University of Melbourne

Value of the Grower Group networks in the agricultural extension landscape

2

Stimulating private sector extension in Australian agriculture to increase returns from R&D

Stimulating private sector extension in Australian agriculture to increase returns from R&D

(http://rirg.fvas.unimelb.edu.au/ag-extension)

Research Collaborative Cross-sectoral

Project: Stimulating private sector extension in Australian agriculture to increase returns from R&D

(Rural R&D for Profit program project)

Identify practical proposals to stimulate private sector extension services, particularly to fill current gaps.

Farmer and adviser forums and national surveys Expert Panel & International review Private sector engagement (4 trials)

Adviser capability: 8 on- line learning modules in agricultural extension

R&D, Cross sector collaboration

4

Overview of presentation

• 1. Positioning of grower groups in the national agricultural

extension landscape

• Results from National farmer and adviser survey
• Implications and opportunities for grower group networks
• 2. Results of 4 engagement trials with private sector
• 3. Professional development modules in agricultural

extension

5

Large no. of sole

• perators and SME’s

(1-5 other people in their organisation provided information, advice and support to farmers) (n=324)

• 2. National farmer and adviser

survey

(Farmer: July-September 2016 (Adviser: December 2016-February 2017)

Farmer responses

N=1003 Grains n=171 Mixed cropping/ grazing n= 76 Beef and/or sheep n= 323

Adviser responses

N=655

6

Producers seek new

• pportunities...

77% agree - Grains 75% agree -Sheep (meat) 64% agree -Sheep (Wool) 76% agree -Beef

Q: “Identifying new

• pportunities in

farming is essential”

(n=323 –livestock/mixed); (n=171 grains)

7

However, producers are seeing challenges: knowledge system

46% agree: Mixed cropping/grazing 38% agree: Cropping/ grains 34% agree: Sheep (meat) 32% agree: Beef 31% agree: Sheep (Wool)

Q: “I always know where to get the information or advice that I need”

(n=323 –livestock/mixed); (n=171 grains)

8

and have multiple

• bjectives…

71% agree cropping (grains)* 70% agree mixed cropping/grazing* ……………. 52% agree Sheep (meat) 49% agree Sheep (Wool) 52% agree Beef

Q: “It is important in farming to focus

• n profit”

(n=323 –livestock/mixed); (n=171 grains)

9

Source of information, advice and support

• Government (PUBLIC)
• Research and development corporations/Industry (PUBLIC-

PRIVATE)

• Product reseller / farm input suppliers (PRIVATE-COMMERCIAL)
• Independent (Fee-for-service) advisers (PRIVATE)
• Farmer-owned information, advice and support organisations

(PRIVATE – NOT FOR PROFIT)

• Processing companies (PRIVATE)
• Other NGO – (community/not for profit) (THIRD SECTOR)

10

Farmers used 4 sources of information, advice and support (on average)

Sources where farmers obtained information, advice or support (all n=1003; main source n=978)

4% 7% 32% 10% 11% 14% 20%

10% 53% 63% 64% 69% 72% 85% Other Processing companies you supply Independent (fee-for-service) advisers - such as… Government Farmer-owned information, advice and support… Research and development corporations Product re-sellers / farm input suppliers Currently use Use as main source

4

sources were used on average

11

…and this is expected to increase (five years)

= statistically significant difference *=low base size

Expected use of services overall and by main service used

Q.16. Still thinking about your experiences with [INSERT SOURCE FROM Q11], in the next five years or so, do you expect your use of information, support, or advice to be… Base: All respondents with a main source

10% 9% 7% 20% 56% 53% 52% 51% 31% 36% 38% 25%

More (a lot / a little more)

Same Less (a lot / a little less)

Independent (fee-for-service) advisers (n=305) Research and development corporations (n=152) Government (n=92) Total (n=978)

12

….and ALL sources support change on Australian farms: no monopoly on change

Between 78-82% (n=954 farmers) of farmers described changes related to….

...farm practices ...inputs & products ...farm business …infrastructure, machinery & equipment

(size of category related to number of comments)

13

• changes related to

infrastructure/machinery/equ ipment….

Farmer-owned

• rganisations

were over- represented for influencing this type of change

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Farmer-

• wned

Government Independent fee-for- service Processing companies Product resellers R & D corporations Other Sample Changes to infrastructure, machinery & equipment

14

However, advisors desire more involvement with agricultural research, development and extension

Desire to be involved in various activities:

Q40 - And to what degree would you like to be involved in each of the following activities Base: All Employee and Sole Operators (n=365)

25% 24% 24% 32% 38% 42% 42% 40% 30% 31% 30% 25% 4% 2% 3% 2% 3% 2% 2% 1%

Involved in design, development and delivery

• f extension projects / programs

Discussions / input around research priorities Translation of research outputs Invitations to be kept up to date on extension programs and projects

A lot more Some more No more or less Less A lot less

15

Keeping up to date with the latest research was important for advisers…

1% 4% 3% 5% 6% 20% 11% 11% 11% 23% 20% 26% 30% 46% 48% 60% 62% 65% 65% 66% Advisor networks (e.g. APEN) International sources Farmer-owned extension services… Private companies / product information /… Own farming clients or other farmers Own organisation/internal information Technical experts (e.g. agronomists,… Government departments Australian Research organisations Rural Research and Development… Sources of Information Main Source of Information

Sources of information

Q29 - How important to you is keeping up to date with the latest research related to agriculture? *Online Only Base: All Employee and Sole Operators (n=265) Q30 - To keep up to date with the latest research related to your role, what types of organisation do you go to? Q31 - And what is your main source of information? Base: All Employee and Sole Operators (n=365)

Only codes with 5% or more (Sources of Information) have been shown here

16

Implications and

• pportunities for

Farming groups

ü Farmer groups were those mentioned by most advisory

• rganisations for future collaboration and co-operation

related to information, advice and support for farmers ü Groups appear to provide much of the local/on-ground information and support “soft-infrastructure” that farmers seek – and this helps industry and government achieve their goals.

17

Implications and

• pportunities for Farming

groups (1)

ü Farmer groups are able to bring together the range

• f advisory groups and organisations at a local

level. This is “innovation brokering”.

18

Conclusion: The future of farmer groups? Key questions

The farmer group role is relevant and important for members and the wider “innovation system”

• 1. Is this role acknowledged and clear?
• 2. Is there emerging competition from others for this role?
• 3. Are there opportunities for efficiencies/effectiveness for farmer groups

taking on a stronger role/changing the role?

• 4. Are there collaborations or partnerships for farmer groups that “make

more sense”? (e.g. farm management consultants/machinery providers/product re-sellers)?

19

The trials: taking action (collaborative models to engage the private sector)

Supply-chains through processors (dairy, meat) (VIC)

Lead RDC: Dairy Australia (partners: MLA and APL) 25 advisers (reach to 5475 producers)

Advisory pathways: new entrants and professional development (AUS)

Lead RDC: MLA 11 advisers/firms (associated with dairy, sheep, beef, hort) (reach to 550 producers)

Precision agriculture (cotton, sugar) (QLD)

Lead RDC: Cotton RDC (partners: SRA , Sugar & Cotton consultants; Digital Ag Suppliers) 12 advisers (reach of 250-400 producers)

Knowledge (research) connections (VIC, QLD)

Lead: Victorian government (AgVic) (partners: NSW DPI, SRA, HIA,MLA) 10-15 advisers (reach of 450-600+ producers)

1. 3. 2. 4.

20

Professional Development modules in agricultural extension

By June 30 2018 develop and pilot 8 modules

• f adviser training related to extension skills

and the business model for maintaining demand.

21

The modules being piloted (on-line)

• 1. Social media in agricultural innovation
• 2. Targeting farmers? Segmentation and adjusting advisory approaches.
• 3. Facilitating farm practice change (1) –why do people change?
• 4. Working your network: brokering adviser networks in agricultural innovation.
• 5. Facilitating farm practice change (2) –delivery approaches to enhance

adoption and change

• 6. Making better use of knowledge assets
• 7. Evaluating impact in agricultural innovation and adoption
• 8. Analyzing the whole farm system

22

23

Stimulating private sector extension in Australian agriculture to increase returns from R&D

Stay in touch: Stimulating private sector extension in Australian agriculture to increase returns from R&D

(http://rirg.fvas.unimelb.edu.au/ag-extension)

24

Acknowledgements

l

All the farmers and advisers attending forums and responding to the surveys

l

Quantum Market Research: Survey administration and reporting

l

Dr Erin Smith, University of Melbourne: Qualitative data analysis

l

Nhan La, University of Melbourne: Quantitative data analysis To cite data from this presentation: University of Melbourne (2017), Milestone 3-Activity 4 Quantify farm demand for services and the value placed on advice by farmers, Report submitted to Rural R&D for profit program as part of the ‘Stimulating private sector extension to increase returns from R&D’ project, May,

• 2017. Rural Innovation Research Group, Melbourne.

25

References

Birner, R., K. Davis, J. Pender, E. Nkonya, P. Anandajayasekeram, J. Ekboir, A. Mbabu, et al. 2009. “From Best Practice to Best Fit: A Framework for Designing and Analyzing Pluralistic Agricultural Advisory Services Worldwide.” The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 15 (4): 341–355 Klerkx, L., & Leeuwis, C. 2008. Matching demand and supply in the agricultural knowledge infrastructure: Experiences with innovation intermediaries. Food Policy, 33, 260–276 Mullen, J. D., Vernon, D. and Fishpool, K. I. 2000, 'Agricultural extension policy in Australia: Public funding and market failure' in The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 629-645 Nettle, R. Klerkx, L., Faure, G. and Koustouris, A. (2017) Governance dynamics and the quest for coordination in pluralistic agricultural advisory systems. Journal of agricultural education and extension http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2017.1320638 Nettle, R. (2017) Workshop Paper: Farmers Adopting and farmers benefitting from R&D – where are we now? Paper prepared for the Annual Forum: “Stimulating private-sector extension to increase returns from R&D, Metropolis, Melbourne, held on 17th May, 2017. Pannell, D.J. and Marsh, S.P. (2013). Public-sector agricultural extension: what should it look like in 10 years? Farm Institute Insights, Vol. 10, No. 1, February 2013 Paschen, J-A., Reichelt, N., King, B., Ayre, M., Nettle, R. (2017) Enrolling advisers in governing privatised agricultural extension in Australia: challenges and opportunities for the research, development and extension system. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1389224X.2017.1320638 Prager, K, Labarthe, P, Caggiano, M, Lorenzo-Arribas, A. (2016) How does commercialisation impact on the provision of farm advisory services? Evidence from Belgium, Italy, Ireland and the UK. Land Use Policy, 52, 329-344. Prager, K., R. Creaney, and A. Lorenzo-Arribas. 2017. “Criteria for a System Level Evaluation of Farm Advisory Services.” Land Use Policy 61: 86–98