Agricultural Extension System in India
Agricultural Extension System in India
Agricultural Extension System in India
K.M. Singh and M.S. Meena and B.E. Swanson and M.N.
Reddy and R. Bahal
Online at http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/59461/
MPRA Paper No. 59461, posted 26. October 2014 01:07 UTC
IN-DEPTH STUDY OF THE
PLURALISTIC AGRICULTURAL
EXTENSION SYSTEM IN INDIA
K.M. SINGH
M.S. MEENA
B.E. SWANSON
M.N. REDDY,
AND
R. BAHAL
Authors
Dr. Krishna M. Singh is Principal Scientist (Agricultural Economics) and Head, Division of Socio
Economics and Extension at ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region, Patna since April 2009. Prior to
this, he held the post of Professor of Agricultural Economics and Head, Department of Dairy Economics,
at Sanjay Gandhi Institute of Dairy Science & Technology, Patna, then a unit of Rajendra Agricultural
University, Bihar, India. An alumni of G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology Pantnagar, Dr
Singh has more than 28 years of professional experience in the field of agricultural economics and
extension research. He has served as Director, of organizations like Agricultural Technology
Management Agency (ATMA), Patna, and State Agricultural Management & Extension Training Institute
(SAMETI), Patna, Bihar where he got an opportunity to spearhead the implement of extension reforms
in the state of Bihar.
Dr. Singh’s efforts on extension reforms were duly recognized by the Government of India and The
World Bank. He was invited to share his views on extension reforms in the National Agricultural Summit,
2006 by Ministry of Agriculture and he was also invited by the World Bank to prepare a Good Practice
Note on ATMA Model in India in 2005. His efforts resulted in accepting the ATMA model as core
institution for reforming agricultural extension in the country by the Government of India. Dr. Singh has
worked extensively on market-driven extension, value chain analysis along with agricultural and
livestock economic issues.
Dr. Singh has been invited to present his work at various international forums. He was also associated
with developing an extension system for Afghanistan under AWATT project, funded by the USAID and
had also worked as Consultant for international organizations like The World Bank, USAID, FAO, CRS and
ILRI etc. He has many publications in peer reviewed national and international journals, text books, book
chapters, and extension publications to his credit. Dr. Singh has also worked as a Resource Person for
FAO of UN for Asia and Pacific Region (FAO-RAP), Bangkok on Market-led Agricultural Advisory Services.
He is currently engaged in implementation of Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded, project,
“Tracking Change in Rural Poverty in Household and Village Economies in South Asia” in Eastern Indian
states of Bihar and Jharkhand.
Dr. M. S. Meena is a Senior Scientist (Agricultural Extension) at ICAR Research Complex for Eastern
Region, Patna, Bihar. He has completed his Master and Post Doctorate degree from National Dairy
Research Institute (NDRI), Karnal (Haryana) with Fellowship from ICAR, New Delhi. He got selected
Agricultural Research Service (ARS) in 1998 and initially posted at Central Institute of Post-Harvest
Engineering & Technology (CIPHET), Abohar (Punjab) in 2000. In 2004, he transferred to CIPHET,
Ludhiana (Punjab) to strengthen the transfer of technology process.
Dr. Meena joined at ICAR Research Complex for Eastern Region, Patna (Bihar) in 2007 as a Senior
Scientist through Direct Recruitment from Agricultural Scientist Recruitment Board, New Delhi. Society
of Extension Education, Agra has honored him as Young Scientist Award for 2009. In more than 12 years
of his professional career, he has completed many institutional and externally funded research projects.
His most recent concluded project is “Capacity Building of Farmers and Field Functionaries for Scaling up
of Water Productivity” sponsored by Ministry of Water Resources, New Delhi. He is also working on a
project “Tracking Change in Rural Poverty in Household and Village Economy in South Asia”—sponsored
by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. He is also associated in a networking project with NAARM,
Hyderabad on “Value Chain of High Value Crops in Economically Backward Region: Efficiency, Institutions
and Policy Environment”. His most recent projects are Impact Assessment of Agricultural Technologies
and Tribal Farming Systems in Eastern India.
His latest published book is “ICTs for Agricultural Development in Changing Climate” authored by K. M.
Singh and M. S. Meena. He has many publications in peer reviewed journals. He is a Reviewer/Editor of
many National and International journals and associated with many Professional Societies. Dr. Meena’s
interest is in developing Extension Methodologies, Building Social Capital, Market Led Extension,
Training Need and Impact Assessment, Gender Perspective in Integrated Farming System, Scaling up of
Water Productivity, Value Chain Analysis, Tribal Farming Systems, ICTs and Socio-economic & Policy
Issues in Agriculture.
Dr. Burton E. Swanson is Professor Emeritus of Rural Development at the University of Illinois. Burton
Swanson’s international career now spans 50 years, starting as a Peace Corps Volunteer in Cyprus in
1962. After working as the Agriculture Officer in Peace Corps Washington, he completed his M.S. degree
in International Agricultural Development at University of California at Davis and then served as the first
training officer at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) in Mexico, working
closely with Norman Borlaug, Father of the Green Revolution and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in
1970. He then completed his PhD at the University of Wisconsin—Madison in 1974 where he conducted
a comparative analysis of the CIMMYT and IRRI’s training programs.
Swanson joined the University of Illinois faculty in 1975 and has had an exemplary career in the field of
International Agriculture and Rural Development. He was the originator of the International Program for
Agricultural Knowledge Systems (INTERPAKS) at UIUC in 1982 and has worked in more than 40
developing countries and has trained more than 400 extension officials from over 35 countries as part of
the INTERPAKS effort. He was the founding president of the International Association of Agricultural and
Extension Education (AIAEE) in 1984 and has written/edited many FAO extension books, plus many
other refereed papers and conference presentations.
His most recent book was published by the World Bank in March 2010 on Strengthening Agricultural
Extension and Advisory Systems. In addition to these many publications, Swanson has designed and/or
supervised major World Bank extension projects in Asia (i.e. China, India, Indonesia and Sri Lanka). More
recently, he designed and is now helping implement the Modernizing Extension and Advisory Service
(MEAS) project. During Swanson’s career, he has received many awards and recognitions; among the
latest was the “Lifetime Achievement Award” given to Swanson by the International Society of Extension
Education (INSEE) at their first International Conference in Goa, India during 2008.
Dr. M.N. Reddy is a Former Director (Agril. Extn. & Commn.), National Institute of Agricultural Extension
Management (MANAGE), Hyderabad, India. He was Professor of Agricultural Extension in Andhra
Pradesh Agricultural University for two decades before joining in MANAGE. He is graduated in
Agriculture from Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University Hyderabad and did his Ph.D., (Agri. Extn.,) from
Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi. He has awarded Gold Medal in M.Sc., and National
Communication Research award for the outstanding Research in the field of Communication Research in
India. He also received Silver and Gold level certificates in the field of Extension and Management.
He served as National Facilitator for MANAGE-COVERDALE (U.K.) Program between June 1991 and
March 1995 in the areas of Agricultural Extension Management. As Principal Coordinator (Extension
Reforms) developed, tested and operationalized the reforms agenda leading to the institutionalization
of the concept of Agricultural Technology Management Agency (ATMA) and Strategic Research and
Extension Plans (SREPs). Served as International Consultant to Agricultural Sector Management Support
Project for developing Country Level Master Trainers at Republic of Yemen and to the Farm Privatization
Project, Govt. of Tajikistan. As Principal Coordinator (DAESI) developed an innovative program for Agri-
Input Dealers, first of its kind in the country called “DAESI” (Diploma in Agricultural Extension Services
for Input Dealers) in the year 2003-04 with an objective of transforming input dealers into para-
professionals enabling them to serve the farmers better with appropriate technical inputs.
As Principal Coordinator (PGDAEM) a Post Graduate Diploma in Agricultural Extension Management was
designed and launched through distance education mode in 2007-08 for the extension functionaries of
agriculture and allied sectors in India. As Principal Coordinator Mass Media support to Agricultural
Extension trained about 266 producers of Doordarshan and FM Radio Stations. As teacher, Researcher &
Trainer offered courses to the Post Graduate students in the areas of Agricultural Extension
Management Systems, Mass Media Communication, Diffusion and Adoption of Innovations,
Organizational Communication, Training Management and supervised the Research Projects leading to
M.Sc., and Ph. D., Trained Field Extension Functionaries and Scientists of State Agricultural Universities
(SAUs) in the fields of Extension Methodology and Communication Techniques, Extension Management,
Training Methodology, Strategic Planning and Market Led Extension. Published about 70 Research
papers in the leading National and International Journals besides contributing few chapters in Books.
Ram Bahal, an M. Sc. (Agricultural Extension) from the University of Kanpur and Ph. D. from the
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, USA is Ex-professor and Head Division of Agricultural
Extension, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, India. Earlier, he was a faculty at the C. S.
Azad University of Agriculture and Technology Kanpur. At Indian Agricultural Research Institute, he
taught more than 34 year and guided 26 students at M. Sc. and Ph. D. level. Dr. Bahal has competed
sixteen research projects of which four were funded by external sources. He has developed a concept of
Rural Social Center and prototype of Expert System in Extension. There are more than 50 research
papers, 5 books, 12 training manuals and many other publications to his credit. He has been bestowed
a number of awards like Dr. S. Radhakrishnan Memorial Award for outstanding teaching.
Executive Summary
This In-Depth Study of the Pluralistic Agricultural Extension System in India is a full analysis of
the pluralistic extension system in India, how it has changed over many years and the direction it
is currently moving.
Chapter-1 outlines the Evolution of the Pluralistic Agricultural Extension System in India
and the changes that have occurred since about 1871, including the establishment of the
Department of Agriculture in 1882. Following independence in 1947, many changes have
happened as outlined in this first chapter, including the Community Development Program
(CDP), the Intensive Agricultural District Program (IADP), including dissemination of high-
yielding varieties during the Green Revolution, the Training and Visit (T&V) approach and then
the move to the decentralized, farmer-led and market driven approach influenced by the
Agricultural Technology Management Agency (ATMA) model.
Chapter-2 gives an Overview of the Public Extension System within the Ministry of
Agriculture (MoA), the State Departments of Agriculture and then provides more detailed
information about the Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVK) and the public extension system in India. It
starts with an overview of the organizational structure at the national level, including the
Department of Agricultural Research and Extension (DARE), then into the Department of
Agriculture and Cooperation (DAC) and Directorate of Extension within DAC. Then, it moves
into the KVKs, which are a critical linkage at the district level between research, extension and
farmers. In short, KVKs focus on the specific agro-ecological conditions within each district and
then, after conducting research on these different crops, livestock and other farming systems.
Then it moves into the development of the ATMA model through two World Bank projects,
which is now expand across all Indian districts.
Chapter-3 outlines the Directorates of Extension Education within each State Agricultural
Universities (SAUs). India is unique in having Extension units established within each SAU,
since this extension approach was first introduced by selected US Land Grant Universities into
these SAUs in the late 1950s and early 1960s. This chapter outlines the historical development
of the extension within each SAU and then outlines the mandate, organizational structure, human
resources and methods used within these SAUs and their relationship with the public extension
system.
Chapter-4 outlines the Private Sector Advisory Services being provided in India, especially in
the provision of good advisory services through private Agri-Business Companies through the
sale of inputs to farmers. In India, there are over 280,000 input supply firms, but many do not
have sufficient knowledge and experience in providing good advisory services to farmers. At
first, the public and private sector did not want to work together but through the ATMA
approach, the public and private sector started working together and then, in 2004, the National
Institute of Agricultural Extension Management (MANAGE) started training and giving
diplomas to the participants from these private sector firms, especially in Andhra Pradesh (see:
http://www.manage.gov.in/daesi/daesi.htm).
Chapter-5 summarizes the role and activities of the different Commodity Boards currently
operating in India, including: Central Silk Board (CSB), Coconut Development Board (CDB),
Coffee Board, Coir Board, Rubber Board, Spices Board, Tea Board, Tobacco Board, National
Dairy Development Board (NDDB), National Horticulture Board (NHB), Cashew Export
Promotion Council (CEPC), National Jute Board (NJB), and the National Federation of
Cooperative Sugar Factories (NFCSF) and how each of these boards carry out extension and
advisory services to the farmers being served.
Chapter-6 outlines the Institutional Mechanism for Capacity Building to strengthen the
pluralistic extension system in India. This chapter starts with an overview of the National
Institute of Agricultural Extension Management (MANAGE), which is an autonomous
organization that has had the most impact on strengthening the extension system in India. Next,
it discusses the paradigm shift within the National Institute of Agricultural Marketing (NAIM) in
India; and then outlines the role of the Extension Education Institutes (EEIs). Finally, it moves
to outline the role and structure of the State Agricultural Management and Extension Training
Institutes (SAMETIs), especially in strengthening the ATMA model in India.
Chapter-7 is the conclusion chapter that outlines the Strengths and Weaknesses of India’s
Pluralistic Extension System. It starts by outlining the Policy Framework and Reforms for
strengthening the pluralistic extension system in India. Next, it outlines how to strengthen
research-extension linkages as well as capacity building among extension workers. Next, it
addresses how to empower farmers, including women farmers. It also outlines the use of
Information Technology (IT) and how to strengthen it through different approaches. This chapter
also outlines the changing role of government in extension and how the ATMA model can be
strengthened following very specific details. The other issue is how to strengthen the SAMETIs,
since they still need to be strengthened in providing service to district and block level extension
workers. This chapter ends with a brief summary the key role that the public extension system
can play in India.
Chapter-1
Evolution of the Agricultural
Extension System in India
B.E. Swanson1 K.M. Singh, M.S. Meena and M.N. Reddy
Initially, extension work in India started in the middle of the nineteenth century (1871) with the
establishment of the Department of Agriculture (DOA) at the central level. By 1882 all the
Indian states had state departments of agriculture. However, there was no extension
infrastructure to impart farm-related knowledge to the farmers. The agriculture departments had
no impact on food production as they were mainly concerned with compiling statistics, mainly to
collect revenue.
The then-British government showed its first concern for the people’s welfare by establishing the
Famine Commission in 1901. For the first time, this commission recommended the appointment
of experts who were capable of applying scientific methods in agriculture. Subsequently, in
1919, under an act of the government of India, all the departments connected with rural
development were transferred to the provinces of the time. Perhaps this was the first step ever
taken by the government towards decentralization of development administration.
The second step toward agricultural development was the landmark recommendations made by
the Royal Commission on Agriculture in 1928. It pointed out the importance of transferring new
research findings to help cultivators. It recommended organization of field demonstrations, short
courses in agriculture and the use of visual aids in agricultural development.
The main people’s programs in rural development and social reforms were initiated by reformers
and community leaders like Rabindra Nath Tagore (Shantiniketan) and Mahatma Gandhi
1
Adapted from the Policy Framework for Agricultural Extension. Directorate of Extension, Department of
Agricultural Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India; Pangtey, V.S. “Agricultural Extension in
India, Country Paper presented at the Regional Workshop on Operationalizing Reforms in Agricultural Extension in
South Asia, sponsored by the Ministry of Agriculture and The World Bank. New Delhi, May 6-8, 2003, and TATA
Consultancy Services, Study on Reorganization of Directorate of Extension (DoE) to Support Agricultural
Development in India (Final Report). New Delhi, August 2002; and Review of the Agricultural Extension System in
India, prepared by B.E. Swanson and P.N. Mathur for the World Bank in 2003.
(Sevagram). Some of the other notable programs in rural development were provided through
Servants’ of India Society, Poona, Madras, central provinces and united provinces, Adarsh Seva
Sangh, Pohri, Garhwal, Indian Village Service, Lucknow and Etah by A.T. Mosher and B.N.
Gupta, Sarvodaya program, Bombay province. Service-oriented extension works were
undertaken by the Christian College, Nagpur and rural reconstruction work initiated by the
Christian Missionary attached to the Allahabad Agriculture Institute. Most of these non-
governmental efforts were limited to small areas and were individual initiatives; hence, the
activities could not expand further.
With this background, the government of the time initiated development programs through some
enthusiastic administrators like F.L. Brayne (Gurgaon Project), Sir Deniel Hamilton (Rural
Reconstruction in Sunderbans, Bengal) and Dr. Spencer Hatch (Marthandam Project). Being
individual efforts, these projects soon fell apart due to a lack of peoples’ support. Other lesser
known development initiatives, like the Firka Development Scheme of Madras Province (1946),
met the same fate. This program was the first joint effort of the government and the people, but
could not make much headway due to lack of direction and support of the central government.
Through the critical evaluation of earlier extension innovations/approaches, the reasons’ of
failure and various lessons learnt can be summarised as;
Reasons of failure
The planning commission set up by the government of India in 1950 summarized the various
reasons for failure of earlier extension efforts by government and voluntary organizations as:
Most of the schemes were of short duration
Activities were not properly planned and coordinated
Initiatives come from the government side and not from the people, and
Some basic problems like land tenure, rural credit etc. remained untouched.
Lessons’ learnt
Albert Mayer spearheaded the first post-independence extension program in the district of
Etawah (Uttar Pradesh) in 1948. This was, perhaps, the first example of peoples’ participation in
rural development. This also marked the beginning of the multi-purpose village worker that
exists even today. The experiences generated through this pilot project were the precursors of the
Community Development Program (CDP) started in 1952.
The basic extension machinery in India today is the outcome of the short-lived Grow More Food
(GMF) campaign that was started by the Food Minister Shri K.M. Munshi in 1947. Although
additional field staff members were provided at the district and sub-divisional levels to develop
contacts with the farmers and to introduce improved techniques of farming, this campaign fizzled
for want of a formal extension organization.
The GMF Enquiry Committee, which was established by the government of India (1951-1952),
analysed the reasons why this campaign failed. As a result of this analysis, the committee
recommended that a formal extension organization be established in the country that could reach
all farmers and assist them in a coordinated development program. The existing extension setup
at the block and village levels was the most important contribution of this committee. Similar
views were expressed by the Fiscal Commission set-up by the government of India in 1949. The
commission highlighted the need for bridging the gap between research and its application on
farmers’ fields. In retrospect, although these initial extension projects were short-term and
implemented on a small scale, they were instrumental in formulating an extension policy and in
giving shape to the emerging extension system.
Based on the experiences gained through the different development efforts outlined above, the
government made the decision to expand extension throughout the country. The first mega
project was the Community Development Program (CDP) that was initiated in 1952 by the
Indian Planning Commission. The CDP was conceived as the main instrument of rural
transformation in the country. The Ministry of Community Development and Cooperative was
constituted to implement this project on a pilot basis in 55 project areas having 300 villages and
a population of 2 lakhs. The block was taken as the basic unit of development and
administration. At this level, a team of subject matter extension officers were posted to undertake
extension work in the fields of agriculture, animal husbandry, cooperation, industries, rural
industries, social education, etc. Each project had about 60 multi-purpose, village-level
workers—one for each group of 5 to 10 villages.
The CDP program was launched on the Objectives of the Community Development
auspicious day of October 2, 1952, the program during the 1960s and 1970s:
birthday of Mahatma Gandhi. As people Assist villages in having an effective
responded very favourably to the CDP, the panchayat (village council), cooperative
and school.
program was scaled up in 1953 as the Plan and carry out integrated, multi-
National Extension Service (NES) to provide phased family, village, block and
wide coverage to extension work at less cost district plans through these village
and with more people’s participation. Each institutions.
The aim of the CDP was to increase
NES block had about 100 villages, with a
agricultural productivity, improve
population of about 65,000. Both programs village crafts, provide minimum
were complementary and ran concurrently in essential health services, provide
the country. This arrangement became the required educational and recreational
facilities, improve rural housing and
permanent setup of extension in the country, provide programs for village women
including at the state level. and youth.
Although the Panchayati Raj started with a fanfare, political interference and bureaucratic
neglect soon dumped it into stagnation. It was an irony that only Balwantrai Mehta was asked to
find out why the system failed. Mehta (1978) produced another report on the Panchayati Raj
institutions and blamed marginalization of village institutions for the problems of Panchayati
Raj. In fact, these institutions soon became the hubs of political factionalism and inefficiency.
However, some states made an attempt to revive the system after 1977 by remedying the ills
experienced in the past. The landmark in this rejuvenation process was the 73rd Amendment to
the Constitution Act (1992). Thus, the process of shifting power to the people had begun.
The focus of the program was on increasing The 73 rd Amendment (1992) to the Constitution
food production through the intensive Ensured:
application of all resources in selected 16 Constitution of Panchayats through
elections.
resource-rich districts with assured
Broad-based representation of people,
potentialities. The program that was finally including elected leaders in these
launched from the 1960 kharif season institutions.
envisaged that extension agencies would Reservation of seats for scheduled
prepare farm plans for individual farmers and castes and scheduled tribes in
Panchayats, including women from
provide all possible facilities so as to rapidly these groups.
increase food production. A team of Village One-third reservation for women in
Level Workers (VLWs) and Subject Matter Panchayats at all levels.
Specialists (SMSs) was placed in the blocks to Adequate powers with responsibilities
to the Panchayats.
undertake this intensive effort. To give
Regular elections to the Panchayats.
information support, farm information units
were established in the states.
The IADP conceived farmers as “receivers” of technology that was pushed through in the form
of a package of technology. It was presumed that the farmers were unable to access technology
that was otherwise available from the extension agencies. However, the team of 9000 extension
workers, with a ratio of 1:325 farmers, succeeded only in highlighting the importance of
intensive efforts in agricultural development.
Based on the success of the IADP, an intensive program of extension was launched in 1964 that
aimed at achieving higher production within limited resources. This was the need of the day as
resources were scarce but the aim had to be achieved. This was the initiation of the Intensive
Agricultural Area Program (IAAP). It was basically a crop oriented program that met success as
many high yielding varieties of cereal crops were readily available to the farmers.
Based on the production potential of the new high yielding wheat and rice varieties developed by
the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and the International Rice
Research Institute (IRRI), the Indian government initiated the “High Yielding Variety Program”
(HYPV) in the mid-1960s and launched the much-needed Green Revolution. While the Green
Revolution solved the immediate food problems of the country, some people raised the question
about the utility of extension work because the new dwarf wheat and rice varieties spread rapidly
without extension’s direct involvement. A study conducted by Lowdermilk in Pakistan’s Punjab
supported this contention as within six years of introduction of dwarf wheat varieties, all the
farmers, irrespective of size of holding, adopted the same without extension interventions.
Another study (Nayman, 1990) showed that this situation continued even after 20 years with
farmers using fellow farmers and private market representatives as their main sources of
information.
Although the HYVPs spread rapidly and with dramatic effect in irrigated areas without
extension’s direct involvement, there was not a comparable “silver bullet” for rain-fed
agriculture. Even in the irrigated areas, production problems soon emerged as the HYVPs rapidly
extracted both macro- and micro-nutrients from the soil. Soon, extension was being called on to
disseminate information to farmers on Integrated Soil Nutrient Management (ISNM). Many of
the HYVPs soon became susceptible to common diseases as they mutated to form new bio-types
and as the genetic resistance of the HYVPs broke down. In addition, some types of agro-
chemicals lost their luster as economically important insects also developed resistance to
pesticides due to their overuse or improper use by farmers. Furthermore, the environmental and
health concerns of overusing agricultural chemicals soon called for “knowledge intensive”
extension programs on Integrated Pest Management (IPM).
In short, the HYVPs allowed India to achieve self-sufficiency in the basic food grains, but
agricultural development is more than just HYVPs and agro-chemicals. Most small farmers
remain poor and operate at the subsistence level. Even in the Punjab, large and progressive
farmers who have profited greatly from the HYVPs are now reluctant to modify their farming
systems as a result of the serious natural resource management problems that have resulted from
the intensive use of the HYVPs.
The introduction of the Training-and-Visit (T&V) extension system was an important milestone
in the history of extension in India. The basic premise of T&V was that there was enough
technology available awaiting diffusion to and adoption by the farmers. It was presumed that
adoption of technologies was poor because of poorly managed extension services. Daniel Benor,
the father of the T&V system, said: “The main attributes of T&V are a set of practices to
enhance the management of agricultural extension that are sensible features most extension
organizations would embrace.” It was also expressed as a set of elementary management
principles translated into procedures for organizing, supervising and instructing a dispersed
extension field staff.
The T&V extension system was first introduced in 1974-1975 on a pilot basis in the Chambal
Command area of Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh. Based on the positive feedback the project
was further extended to 17 other states in 1978-1979. Thus the Community Development
Program (CDP), and its multi-purpose approach, was gradually replaced by the organized
extension system with a single line of command focusing on the major food grains (i.e., food
security).
However, the impact of T&V in terms of effectiveness and performance is still a debatable issue.
Many studies have shown that this system had a differential impact and achieved success mainly
in irrigated areas. Also, the large increase in staff called for under the T&V system put a heavy
burden on state resources, with most funds being spent to meet the salary bill. This large
contingent of poorly trained field staff (most were only secondary school diploma holders)
became a liability as time passed. The system Main Features of the T&V Extension
further encouraged hierarchical tendencies that System
already existed in the centralized management Single line of control from
system. Moreover, the strict timetable of visits Director of Agriculture down to
the Village Level Worker (VLW)
could not be adhered to because of the lack of level,
training and travel funds. Therefore, the T&V Field and farm orientation of all
system was quite limited in what it could offer extension staff,
farmers (the production technology for the basic Regular feedback from the
farmers for research,
food grains did not change that much from year Regular training of extension
to year), and the system did not encourage personnel and farmers, and
frontline extension workers to respond to the Regular supervision of extension
other educational needs of rural farm workers.
households. Consequently, T&V extension was no longer considered to be cost-effective, and it
did not address the broader policy issues of alleviating rural poverty and improving rural
livelihoods.
Even so, the basic T&V system continues to operate in most states even after the termination of
the Third National Agricultural Extension Project (NAEP) (early 1990s). However, most states
have modified the system to reflect their lack of resources to fund basic extension activities. For
example, there have been sharp reductions in the frequency of training and visits. Instead, pre-
season workshops (Zonal Research-Extension Advisory Committees) have been introduced to
plan extension programs. In addition, the vast majority of extension activities are funded through
central government programs and each line department is expected to implement its own unique
set of government subsidy and incentive programs. A more complete analysis of this current
institutional arrangement follows in the second section of this report. A brief outlook of the
extension innovations in India can be visualised from table 1.1.
Table-1.1 Post-Independence Innovations in Indian Agricultural Extension
Year Programmes/Projects
Community Development
1952 Community Development Programme (CDP)
1953 National Extension Service (NES)
1954 Community Development Block (CDB)
1957 Panchayati Raj (Democratic Decentralization)
Technological Development
1960 Intensive Agricultural District Programme (IADP)
1964 Intensive Agricultural Area Programme(IAAP)
1964-65 Intensive Cattle Development Project(ICDP)
1966 High Yielding Variety Programme (HYVP)
Development with Social Justice
1970-71 Small Farmers Development Agency (SFDA)
Marginal Farmers’ and Agricultural Laborers Programme (MF & ALP)
Drought Prone Area Programme (DPAP)
1972-73 Pilot Project for Tribal Development
1974 Training & Visit System (T & V System)
1978-79 Integrated Rural Development Programme (IRDP)
1979 Training of Rural Youth for Self Employment (TRYSEM)
1980 National Rural Employment Programme (NREP)
1982 Development of Women and Children in Rural Areas (DWCRA)
1983 National Agricultural Extension Project (NAEP)
1986 Technology Mission on Oilseeds (TMO)
1989 Jawahar Rojgar Yojna (JRY)
1993 Employment Assurance Schemes
1994 Small Framers Agri-Business Consortium (SFAC)
1999 Swarnjayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojna
Indian Council of Agricultural Research/Technology Transfer Projects/Services
1974 Krishi Vigyan Kendras
1974-75 Operational Research Projects
1979 Lab to Land Programme
1995-96 Technology Assessment and Refinement through Institute Village Linkage
Programme (TAR-IVLP)
1998-2003 National Agricultural Technology Project-Innovations in Technology
Disseminations (NATP-ITD)
2002-07 Continued as “Support to State Extension Programmes for Extension
Reforms”
2004 Kisan Call Centre
2007-12 National Agricultural Innovation Project (NAIP)
Sources: Authors (from various reports and books)
EMERGENCE OF PLURALISTIC EXTENSION SYSTEMS IN INDIA
Several institutional innovations have come up in response to the weaknesses in these public
research and extension systems that have given enough indications of the emergence of an
agricultural innovation system in India. This has resulted in the blurring of the clearly
demarcated institutional boundaries between research, extension, farmers, farmers' groups,
NGOs and private enterprises. This pluralistic extension system should play the role of
facilitating the access to and transfer of knowledge among the different entities involved in the
innovation systems and creates competent institutional modes to improve the overall
performance of the innovation system. Inability to play this important role would further
marginalize extension efforts. In India, the main agency for agricultural development is Union
Ministry of Agriculture at national level and the state Departments of Agriculture. In the first line
extension system, the Indian Council for Agricultural Research (ICAR) and the State
Agricultural Universities (SAUs) play a major role through organizing demonstrations, training,
etc. on a limited scale, but forceful enough to have a catalytic influence on other extension
systems and sub-systems. The detail description of various agencies at central, state and district
level has been depicted in Figure-2.1. However, brief description regarding the
institutions/agencies involved in pluralistic extension system is presented below.
CENTRAL LEVEL
The Union Ministry of Agriculture (www.agricoop.nic.in)—a branch of the Government of
India, is the apex body for the formulation and administration of rules and regulations and laws
relating to agriculture in India. The Union Ministry of Agriculture comprises Department of
Agriculture & Cooperation (DAC), Department of Agricultural Research and Education and
Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries. Secretary, Agriculture & Cooperation
is the administrative head of the department and is responsible for formulation and
implementation of policies of Agriculture and Cooperation. The DAC is responsible for
formulation and implementation of national policies and programmes. The record production of
244.78 million tonnes of food grains during 2010-11 has been achieved through effective transfer
of latest technologies and development schemes being implemented by the Department of
Agriculture & Cooperation backed by remunerative prices for various crops through enhanced
minimum support prices. The institutions engaged in extension of agricultural activities under
the public sector have been discussed below.
Private sector
Agricultural extension by commercial companies, i.e., seed and input companies, aggregators,
processors is advancing rapidly in India. Contact farming is an increasingly important vehicle for
“embedded services” information tied to input sales or marketed produce (Feder et al., 2011).
Numerous moves have been made in India towards privatization of agricultural extension
services. This move mainly occurred through experimental and pilot projects, as well as schemes
during the past decade. But the bulk of extension services remain by and large public and free of
charge for farmers. There are a large number of agricultural companies (about 280,000) but none
may be called as a full-fledged private agricultural advisory company. Companies may work
independently or in partnership with other organizations across all sectors. The basic objectives
behind the information services are to speed up the product’s safe and effective use, expand
market share, and ensure the necessary supply of commodities. A variety of model currently
exists for delivering and financing extension by private providers. There are an estimated
282,000 input dealers in India. They are pillars of their communities, and have every interest to
offer quality services. Names of a few private agricultural companies, which provide one or more
services like contract farming, agro-processing, inputs supply, consulting, multi-services, and
export, are Mahindra Shubhlabh Services, Ltd. (www.mahindra.com); Syngenta India Ltd.
(www.syngenta.com/country/in/en); ITC Limited (www.itcportal.com/)-India; Indo-American
Hybrid Seeds (www.indamseeds.com); Agro Tech (www.agrotech-india.com); Monsanto India
Ltd. (www.monsantoindia.com) etc. However, the detail about the private sector’s involvement
in agricultural extension is provided in a separate chapter.
Non-Government Organizations (NGOs)
NGOs provide very important support to Indian smallholders even they cannot cover all those
seeking advice as governmental organizations do. Mostly NGOs are supported by donors or
outside sponsors. NGOs range considerably in size with the high social commitment. Many
dedicate themselves as per demand driven extension. Basix, PRADHAN, and BAIF are among
India’s larger NGOs. They operate in numerous states from many years. Basix works with more
than 3.5 million microfinance customers, of whom some 90% are poor rural households and 10%
urban slum dwellers. Eighty percent of its 10,000 employees work in small towns and villages
(http://www.basixindia.com). PRADHAN is a leading promoters of self-help group, aims to
conquer poverty by enhancing poor people’s capabilities and access to sustainable income
opportunities (http://www.pradan.net).The BAIF Development Research Foundation is another
large NGO working in agriculture and livestock development. BAIF has more than 3,000
employees, who operate from some 75 centres. It reaches out to 2.5 million farmers, many in
challenging areas. The government of India recommends that states learn from and work with
BAIF (http://sapplpp.org/links/baif). These NGOs spearhead needs and demand driven
extension. They foster the innovations in participatory way. They reach large number of farmers,
but many more are still in need. Some other examples of NGOs claiming to perform extension
activities are: Self-Employed Women’s Association (SEWA) (www.sewa.org/); Action for
Agricultural Renewal in Maharashtra (AFARM) (www.afarm.org); Energy Environment Group
(EEG) (www.energyenviron.com/); Society for Advancement of Village Economy (SAVE)
(www.niir.org); Arpan Seva Sansthan (http://www.arpansevasansthan.org/) etc.,
Civil Society—Farmers Organizations, Associations and Societies
Civil society organization includes Farmers’ Associations, Cooperatives and Societies employed
in extension of agricultural activities. In India, these organisations have been fairly active for
years aiming self-help for development, specific commodity production, marketing, collective
bargaining and many other purposes. In India, self-help groups are playing greater role in
transfer of agricultural technologies (Meena et al. 2003; Meena et al. 2008; Meena et al. 2011).
Major emphasis has played on poverty alleviation and rural women empowerment. Farmers’
association’s examples are: Punjab Young Farmers Association (India); Indian Farmers
Association; Turmeric Farmers Association of India; Farmers’ Association Pomegranate;
Association of Farmer Companies; Organic Farming Association of India (OFAI) and many
more. Nearly 580,000 cooperatives are functioning in India in addition to 375,000 agricultural
cooperatives with 280 million member farmers. Agricultural cooperatives deal in credit, inputs,
marketing, agro-processing and farm extension services. There are fertilizer cooperatives, sugar
cooperatives, and dairy cooperatives. The Indian Farmers Fertilizer Cooperative Limited
(IFFCO) is one of the biggest manufacturers of fertilizers in the world. The National Agricultural
Cooperative Marketing Federation of India (NAFED) is the focal organization of marketing
cooperatives for agricultural produce in the country, founded under the Ministry of Agriculture
in 1958. It is now one of the largest procurement and marketing agencies for agricultural
products in India.
Commodity Boards
Given the vast area and diverse agro-climatic regions, many different crops, commodities,
animals and fish species are produced across within India. There are 20 agri-export zones within
India. There are five statutory commodity boards under the Department of Commerce. These
boards are responsible for production, development and export of tea, coffee, rubber, spices and
tobacco. In order to promote other commodities, a number of commodity development boards
were established at national and state levels. In most cases, the organizational structure, research,
extension and marketing systems are in the process of changing. Detail information on
commodity boards is provided in a separate chapter. Thirteen centrally governed commodity
boards are listed below.
Central Silk Board (CSB)
Coconut Development Board (CDB)
Coffee Board (CB)
Coir Board
Rubber Board (RB)
Spices Board (SB)
Tea Board (TB)
Tobacco Board (TB)
National Dairy Development Board (NDDB)
National Horticulture Board (NHB)
Cashew Export Promotion Council (CEPC)
National Jute Board (NJB)
National Federation of Cooperative Sugar Factors (NFCSF)
The details about different commodity boards, their mandate, and role played by them have been
discussed separately in succeeding chapters.
Fig. 1.1: Agricultural Extension systems in India
National Institute of
Agricultural Extension
Management
State Agricultural
Indian Council of Universities
Agricultural Research (SAUs)
(DARE) Teaching
Research Krishi Vigyan
Kendras (KVKs)
Zonal Project Applied
Directorates Research
(Zonal Level) Training
State Line Support
Departments
Private Sector Agriculture
Horticulture
Dairy
Fisheries
Commodity Boards Sericulture
Source: Authors
STATE LEVEL
7. State Agricultural Universities (SAUs) and State Line Departments
India has a vast network of SAUs are the major partners in growth and development of
agricultural research and education under the National Agricultural Research System (NARS).
SAUs have statewide responsibility for teaching, research, and extension education. SAUs are
integrating teaching, research and extension at all levels of university administration. Quick
communication of new knowledge to students in class rooms, extension personnel and farmers.
The SAUs are much larger but still small compared with the farm population. SAUs extension
operates through state-level entities, but sometimes reaches out to farmers directly. SAUs are
important but under resourced. It tends to focus on primary production rather than post-harvest
and marketing aspects. Details on SAUs are provided in a separate chapter.
The Directorate of Extension Education (DoEE) is the nodal agency of SAUs for promoting
agricultural development in the state through quick transfer of technology by providing training,
consultancy and farm information to line departments’ professional extension personnel and
farmers. DoEE, works on 3 functional areas, i.e., training, consultancy and communication in
close coordination with Department of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry, Horticulture, Forestry,
Cooperatives, Panchayat Samities and other agencies engaged in betterment of rural people. At
state level, various line departments like Agriculture, Horticulture, Dairy, Fisheries, Sericulture
etc. are also engaged in extension work.
8. Implementing the Agricultural Technology Management Model (ATMA)
By the early 1990s, the Indian extension system was at a crossroads. Since extension had focused
for 20 years on disseminating Green Revolution technology for the major cereal crops, primarily
in irrigated areas, farmers in rain-fed areas had received little attention and realized few benefits
from extension activities. In addition, extension responsibilities were largely carried out by the
state Departments of Agriculture (DOA), which led to problems throughout the greater extension
system. For example, focus was on cereal crops, the DOA became the dominant extension
system, overshadowing other line departments (i.e., Animal Husbandry (DAH), Horticulture
(DOH) and Fisheries (DOF)). These departments had very limited extension capacity and
focused primarily on the provision of subsidized inputs and services to farmers. In addition, these
line departments largely operated independently, with very little collaboration between the
departments and their field staff or among the line departments themselves. As a result, the
“farming systems” approach was not in place.
Other problems also plagued the system. The DOA experienced financial difficulties because of
the large increase in the number of new extension workers that were added under the Training-
and-Visit (T&V) extension system. Additionally, since the central government supplied most of
the program funds, extension priorities were planned from the top-down, excluding farmer input
from the planning process. The dominant focus on food production meant that extension focused
on the major cereal crops and was supply-driven.
Main Features of the ATMA Model
Hallmarks of the “market-driven” system (i.e.,
Taking “farming-systems” approach which
increasing farm income, promoting crop required the integration of extension
diversification) were not priorities. activities across the different line
departments;
To address the situation, in the late 1990s, the Organizing small-scale farmers, including
women, into farmer-interest groups;
government of India and the World Bank pilot-tested Decentralizing extension decision-making
a new, decentralized, farmer-led and market-driven down to the district and block levels
extension model through the Diversified Agricultural including farmer input; and
Support Project (DASP) in Uttar Pradesh (UP) and Linking the farmer-interest groups to
markets for the purpose of increasing
the National Agricultural Technology Project (NATP)
farmer income and creating rural
on a pilot basis. employment.
The NATP was launched by the government of India with the support of the World Bank to test
organizational changes in research and delivery of extension services. The project envisaged the
need for introducing changes in the operational processes for both research and extension apart
from institutional mechanisms and other investments. This new approach was designed to help
farmers diversify into high-value crop and livestock enterprises, the products of which they could
then sell, as a means of increasing farm income, increasing rural employment and alleviating
poverty. The Innovations in Technology Dissemination (ITD) component of NATP was
implemented in 28 districts in the country on a pilot basis.
The key institution in implementing this new approach was the Agricultural Technology
Management Agency (ATMA), which was responsible for facilitating and coordinating “farmer-
led” and “market-driven” extension activities within each district. ATMA focused on a bottom-
up planning process in order to make the entire extension system farmer-driven and farmer-
accountable. This helped strengthen research and extension capabilities, restructure public
extension services and test new institutional arrangements for technology transfer with the
involvement of all the stakeholders of government and non-governmental agencies at the district
level. New institutional arrangements were created at different levels to put the project into
operation.
Conclusions
Extension work in India started in the middle of the nineteenth century. Till independence, it
could not make much headway due to lack of direction and support of the central government.
Since independence, planned efforts were done. In the post-green revolution era, there is a
quantities change in the situation and the food security has been achieved. There are many
extension innovations evolved over a period of time. The Indian pluralistic extension system
faces new challenges. The early 21 st century evolved ATMA—the Agricultural Technology
Management Agency with new thrust emphasises local solutions, diversification, market
orientation and farm income and employment growth. In its pilot days, ATMA was more
successful than later days. Hence there is need to implement with full care.
Decentralizing a large, complex national extension system is not easy, but the Government of
India appears to be moving toward this long-term goal. Although ATMA model has been
successful in addressing many of the extension problems and has shown exceptional impacts
during the NATP phase but it seems to be going the T&V way. It is therefore, imperative that in
the country like India, which has a vast territory and extremely diverse socio-economic and agro-
climatic situations, ATMA model should be introduced and implemented with utter cautious.
Different ATMAs should be empowered with sufficient administrative, financial and
implementation flexibilities to address the basic problems in their operational jurisdiction.
The use of FIGs to mobilize men, women, and young people around common interests, such as
the production of flowers, fruits, vegetables, milk, fish and other high-value products, has
energized both the farming community and the extension staff. Many FIGs have joined to form
farmer associations or federations that can gain economies of scale in serving larger markets.
Developing strong farmer organizations is a positive and necessary step in providing cost-
effective extension services that will increase the income and employment of small-scale and
marginal farm households. The block-level FACs are operational in most project blocks, but
rural women and other disadvantaged groups still need more representation. Internal conflicts
continue between priorities set by the ATMA Governing Boards and the heads of the line
departments in allocating central government resources. The BTTs are still learning how to work
together in utilizing a farming systems approach with multiple funding sources.
There is no doubt that something that resembles a 21st center vision of agricultural extension is
needed and this means substantial reforms in public policies and services. Adding urgency to this
is the ever-increasing complexity of agricultural sector development and the sector’s
acknowledged role in poverty reduction. Of course, it is all too easy to criticize new approaches,
such as ATMA. It is also important to realize that in a country like India and, indeed, elsewhere,
administrative traditions and realities place limits on what is possible and politically feasible
even as a pilot. But the challenge remains of how to break out of this best practice to best fit
impasse.
References
Feder, G., Birner, R., & Anderson, J.R. (2011). The private sector’s role in agricultural extension
systems: Potential and limitations, Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging
Economies, 1(i):31-54.
http://agricoop.nic.in/Atmasei21711.pdf
Singh, K.M; Meena, M.S; and Jha, A.K (2011). Agricultural Innovations in India-Experiences of
ATMA Model, Paper presented in International Conference on Innovative Approaches to
Agricultural Knowledge Management: Global Extension Experiences from November 9-
12, 2011 at NAAS New Delhi organized by International Society of Extension Education
(INSEE).
Singh, K.M. and Meena, M. S., (2011). Agricultural Innovations in India-Experiences of ATMA
Model (Available at SSRN: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1989823)
Singh, K. M., Swanson, Burton E., Jha, A. K. and Meena, M. S. (2012). Extension Reforms and
Innovations in Technology Dissemination-The ATMA Model in India (October 30,
2012). (Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2168642)
Singh, K. M., and Swanson, B. E. (2006). Developing a market-driven extension system in India.
Annual Conference Proceedings of the Association for International Agricultural and
Extension Education, 22: 627–637.
Swanson, B.E. and Mathur, P. N. (2003). Review of the Agricultural Extension System in India,
The World Bank, July 2003.
Swanson, B.E and Rajalahti, R. (2010). Strengthening Agricultural Extension and Advisory
Systems. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Chapter-2
INTRODUCTION
Extension has been traditionally funded, managed and delivered by the public sector all over the
world. Agricultural extension in India has grown over last six decades. It is supported and funded
by the national government—through its Ministry of Agriculture (MoA) and other allied
ministries. The share of agriculture in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has declined from over
half at the time of independence to less than one-fifth this year. Indian agriculture sector has an
impressive long-term record of taking the country out of serious food shortages despite rapid
population increase, given its heavy reliance on the work of its pluralistic extension system. The
main responsibility for extension activities rests with state governments, since agriculture is the
state subject. The central government also implements several technology transfer plans through
state governments. Also, Indian agriculture is becoming increasingly more pluralistic in nature,
where a large number of private sector firms and civil society extension service providers (e.g.
NGOs) co-exist with this public extension system.
AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SYSTEMS
The main agency for agricultural development is Union Ministry of Agriculture at national level
and the state Departments of Agriculture. In the first line extension system, the Indian Council
for Agricultural Research (ICAR) and the State Agricultural Universities (SAUs) play a major
role through organizing demonstrations, training, etc. on a limited scale, but forceful enough to
have a catalytic influence on other extension systems and sub-systems. The description of
various agencies at central, state and district level has been depicted in Figure-2.1.
CENTRAL LEVEL
The Union Ministry of Agriculture (www.agricoop.nic.in) comprises Department of Agriculture
& Cooperation (DAC), Department of Agricultural Research and Education and Department of
Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries. Secretary, Agriculture & Cooperation is the
administrative head of the department and is responsible for formulation and implementation of
policies of Agriculture and Cooperation. The DAC is responsible for formulation and
implementation of national policies and programmes. The record production of 244.78 million
tonnes of food grains during 2010-11 has been achieved through effective transfer of latest
technologies and development schemes being implemented by the Department of Agriculture &
Cooperation backed by remunerative prices for various crops through enhanced minimum
support prices. The agencies engaged in extension of agricultural activities under the public
sector have been discussed below.
Department of Agriculture and Cooperation (DAC)
The DAC (http://agricoop.nic.in/add.htm) comprises several technical directorates (also called
divisions) and one of them is for agricultural extension. The Directorate of Extension, headed by
a Joint Secretary cum Extension Commissioner, is the nodal extension organ at the national
level. The Joint Secretary is assisted by three Joint Commissioners. The directorate provides
policy guidelines and operational backstopping to the state level extension organizations. At
times, it has directly implemented certain major programs. DoE organises agriculture fairs at
national and state level. It also offers model training programmes to develop the skills of the
state extension functionaries. It support to the schemes namely, (i) Central sector scheme on
extension support to central institutions (ii) revised ATMA scheme (iii) Mass media support to
agricultural extension (iv) Revised schemes of Agri-clinics and agri-business centre.
The Directorate of Extension (DoE) (http://vistar.nic.in) was set up under DAC in 1958 in the
wake of launching of Community Development Programmes and National Extension Service
throughout the country in 1953. Apart from functions of dissemination of specific knowledge to
farmers and supervision of the countrywide extension training infrastructure, DoE was also later
called upon to implement National Programmes like Intensive Agricultural District Programme
(IADP) and Intensive Agricultural Areas Programmes (IAAP). However, since 1974 the
emphasis was shifted to Training and Visit system of Extension, which was introduced in 17
major states with the World Bank Assistance. Its role is essentially collaborative, providing
guidance and technical support to the Extension Division. The directorate’s technical units are
extension management, extension training, farm information, and National Gender Resource
Center in Agriculture (NGRCA).The Extension Education Institutes (EEIs) were established at 4
locations, i.e., Nilokheri (Haryana in 1958), Rajendranagar, Hyderabad (A.P. in 1962), Anand
(Gujarat in 1962) and Jorhat, (Assam in 1987) on regional basis to meet the training requirement
to middle level extension functionaries of States and Union Territories as well.
National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management (MANAGE) (www.manage.gov.in)—
located in Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh (AP)—is an autonomous organization established by the
government in 1987 for assisting the central government and the state governments to help
improve their pluralistic extension systems by bringing positive changes in policies, programs,
and personnel skills. Main activities undertaken by the institute are extension capacity building,
research, consultancies, education in management, and documentation. This institute offers
dozens of training courses advertised well in advance. It also offers two post-graduate diploma
programs, one in general management and the other in agricultural extension management. In
addition, a one-year diploma program in agricultural extension services for input dealers was
started in 2004 for imparting formal agricultural education to the dealers. MANAGE is also
responsible for implementing the Agri-Clinics and Agri. Business Centers Scheme (ACABC),
which aims at providing value-added extension services to the doorsteps of farmers by
agricultural professionals. The scheme involves two-month residential training to eligible
agricultural professionals, one-year post training in handholding support, start-up loans by banks
and subsidy by the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD).
MANAGE enjoys highly qualified and experienced faculty and well equipped modern training
infrastructure. Its training programs are open to both public and non-public stakeholders.
Indian Council of Agricultural Research
The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) (http://www.icar.org.in/en/)—is the apex
body for coordinating, guiding and managing research and education in agriculture including
horticulture, fisheries and animal sciences in the entire country. With 99 ICAR institutes and 53
agricultural universities spread across the country this is one of the largest national agricultural
systems in the world. The ICAR has played a pioneering role in ushering Green Revolution and
subsequent developments in agriculture in India through its research and technology
development. It has played a major role in promoting excellence in higher education in
agriculture. It is engaged in cutting edge areas of science and technology development and its
scientists are internationally acknowledged in their fields.
STATE LEVEL
7. State Agricultural Universities and State Line Departments
India has a vast network of SAUs, are the major partners in growth and development of
agricultural research and education under the National Agricultural Research System (NARS).
SAUs have statewide responsibility for teaching, research, and extension education. SAUs are
integrating teaching, research and extension at all levels of university administration. Quick
communication of new knowledge to students in class rooms, extension personnel and farmers.
The SAUs are much larger but still small compared with the farm population. SAUs extension
operates through state-level entities, but sometimes reaches out to farmers directly. SAUs are
important but under resourced. It tends to focus on primary production rather than post-harvest
and marketing aspects. Details on SAUs are provided in a separate chapter.
The Directorate of Extension Education (DoEE) is the nodal agency of SAUs for promoting
agricultural development in the state through quick transfer of technology by providing training,
consultancy and farm information to line departments’ professional extension personnel and
farmers. DoEE, works on 3 functional areas, i.e., training, consultancy and communication in
close coordination with Department of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry, Horticulture, Forestry,
Cooperatives, Panchayat Samities and other agencies engaged in betterment of rural people. At
state level, various line departments like Agriculture, Horticulture, Dairy, Fisheries, Sericulture
etc. are also engaged in extension work.
8. State Agricultural Management and Extension Training Institutes (SAMETI)
There are SAMETI’s in most Indian states and they are autonomous state level institutes with a
mandate of conducting training courses on new agricultural technologies, extension
management, gender issues, extension reform and new information technologies. SAMETIs
provide extension management training for extension agents and functionaries for all the line
departments, including how to make extension more bottom up, farmer-led and market driven.
Apart from providing training, these SAMETIs also facilitate infrastructure in conducting
workshops and reviews.
DISTRICT LEVEL
The major activities of agricultural extension at the district level are the assessment, refinement
and demonstration of technology/products through a network of Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs),
the departments of agriculture, animal husbandry, horticulture, fisheries, etc. and the Agricultural
Technology Management Agency (ATMA).
9. Krishi Vigyan Kendra (KVKs)
Presently, ICAR runs 631 KVKs across the country (table-2.1). KVKs assess, refine and transfer
the agricultural technologies to the farmers in diverse farming systems. Also develop the
capacity of farmers to update their knowledge and skills in modern agricultural technologies.
Trainings are also imparted for extension personnel to orient them in the frontier areas of
technology development. More recently, KVKs are working as resource and knowledge center of
agricultural technology for supporting initiatives of public, private and voluntary sector for
imparting the agricultural economy of the district. Most KVKs have less than 20 staff with the
limited reach. Each KVK has been provided with a team of multi-disciplinary subject matter
specialists for taking up the activities of a KVK. At initial phase, the basic principles were:
i) The Kendra will impart learning through work-experience and hence, will be concerned
with technical literacy, the acquisition of which does not necessarily require the ability to
read and write.
ii) The Kendra will impart training only to those extension workers who are employed and
to the practicing farmers and fishermen. In other words, the Kendra will cater to the
needs of those who are already employed or those who wish to be self-employed.
iii) There will be no uniform syllabus for the Kendras. The syllabus and programme of each
Kendra will be flexible in nature and tailored according to the felt needs, natural
resources and the potential for agricultural growth in that particular area.
Thus, the KVKs (Farm Science Centre) are an innovative science-based institution at district
level which is unique frontline extension system in the World.
In the beginning, the mandate of KVK was confined only to provide vocational skill training to
the farmers, farm women and rural youths in crop production, horticulture, livestock production,
fisheries, home science, farm machinery and implements and other allied vocations such as
apiculture, mushroom cultivation etc. With the consolidation of other front-line extension
projects of the ICAR, during the VIIIth Five Year Plan, such as National Demonstration,
Operational Research Projects, Lab to Land Programme and All India Coordinated Project on
Scheduled Caste/Tribe, the mandate was enlarged to take up on-farm testing, long term
vocational training, in service training for grass-root extension workers and front-line
demonstrations on major cereal, oilseed and pulse crops and other enterprises. The revised
mandate during XIth Plan is technology assessment, refinement and demonstration of
technology/ products before it is taken up by the main extension system. Thus, KVKs have been
effective institutional link between agricultural research system and extension network in India
thereby provide a vehicle for feed-back to research, extension and development systems (DARE
and ICAR, 2006). In NARS, KVKs plays vital role in the agricultural advisory and technology
backstopping. The activities of the KVK include:
On-farm testing to identify the location specificity of agricultural technologies under
various farming systems.
Frontline demonstrations to establish production potential of various crop and enterprises
on the farmer’s fields.
Training of farmers to update their knowledge and skills in modern agricultural
technologies, and training extension personnel to orient them in the frontier areas of
technology development.
To work as resource and knowledge center of agricultural technology for supporting
initiatives of public, private and voluntary sector for improving agricultural economy of
the district.
Mechanism of Monitoring
The performance of KVK is monitored and reviewed at various levels. At the field level, the
Program Coordinator monitors the activities on day-to-day basis whereas the Head of the host
Institution/Organization monitors the technical and financial management of KVK. At the
University level, the concerned Director of Extension Education of the SAUs focuses on the
functioning of KVKs. The Director of Extension Education has been given the responsibility to
provide technologically backstopping and overseeing, irrespective of the host institutions. At the
ICAR headquarters, the Division of Agricultural Extension monitors and reviews the functioning
of the KVKs. Every year, a National KVK conference is organized where all the KVKs
participate to share their experiences, and new approaches followed in implementing the
activities of the KVKs. Critical examination of quarterly progress reports, annual reports, visit-
reports of the ZPDs and annual meetings/conferences/visit constitute other monitoring and
review mechanism. Quinquenal Review Teams (QRTs) and independent evaluations help
improving the quality of functioning of KVKs.
Technology
Application and KVKs: Technology: Systematic
Transfer: Maximize Knowledge and knowledge made
enterprise output for technology applicable in a particular
sustainable agriculture management area in order to achieve
development some values
KVKs need to be strengthened by increased technological backstopping by ICAR and SAUs for
playing the role of knowledge and resource centres effectively and efficiently. There is also a
need for extension research by ICAR research institutes and SAUs to suggest innovative
approaches and methodologies to KVKs for critical assessment of location specific technologies,
frontline demonstrations, effective capacity building of stakeholders, vocational training, and
entrepreneurship development for sharing successful experiences.
Figure-2.2 Knowledge, Resources, Competency, Technology and Organizing Farmers
KRCTO
Knowledge
Farming sys and
Production Sys
Agri. Technology
Markets (Demand and
Prices)
Policy
Tech.
Organize farmers
Resources
Exchange of information
Frontier technologies
Facilitating learning
from experience
Support in decision
making
KVK Capacity Building
Infrastructure
Competency
Critical Technology Evaluating
Products & Technologies
Problem Solving Market intelligence
consultancy Agro-logistics
Seed, Saplings, Bio- Group dynamics
agents etc.
Source: Kokate (2010)
Table-2.1 Network of Zonal Project Directorates and KVKs across Indian states.
Sl. Zone/Head office/Total KVKs States Number of
No. KVKs
1 Zone-I: Ludhiana, Punjab (67 KVKs) Delhi 1
Haryana 18
Himachal Pradesh 12
Jammu and Kashmir 16
Punjab 20
2 Zone-II: Kolkata, West Bengal (80 KVKs) A & N Islands 3
Bihar 38
Jharkhand 22
West Bengal 17
3 Zone-III: Umiam, Meghalaya (74 KVKs) Assam 22
Arunachal Pradesh 13
Manipur 9
Meghalaya 5
Mizoram 8
Nagaland 9
Sikkim 4
Tripura 4
4 Zone-IV: Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh (81 KVKs) Uttar Pradesh 68
Uttarakhand 13
5 Zone-V: Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh (78 KVKs) Andhra Pradesh 34
Maharashtra 44
6 Zone-VI: Jodhpur, Rajasthan (70 KVKs) Rajasthan 42
Gujarat 28
7 Zone-VII: Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh (100 KVKs) Chattisgarh 20
Madhya Pradesh 47
Odisha 33
8 Zone-VIII: Bangalore, Karnataka (81 KVKs) Karnataka 31
Tamil Nadu 30
Kerala 14
Goa 2
Pondicherry 3
Lakshadweep 1
Total 631
Source: http://www.icar.org.in
ATMA: A Mechanism for Broad-Based Extension
ATMA was established at the district level as an autonomous organization registered under
“Societies Registration Act 1860.” ATMA is governed by representatives of technology
generation/refinement and dissemination systems, line departments, the farming community and
other stakeholders who are members of its Governing Board (GB). The GB is headed by the
District Collector with the Project Director serving as its Member Secretary. The ATMA GB
decides extension priorities, based on strategic plans. (Figure-2.4 below illustrates the
organizational structure of ATMA.) ATMA ensures farmer involvement in the decision-making
process and promotes dissemination of farmer-driven technology. ATMA has built-in flexibility
in operating financial resources for extension programs, which are based on bottom-up planning
using the Strategic Research and Extension Plan (SREP). The SREP is developed by a district-
level core team of experts using the Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) approach.
F
W
District U ATMA Governing Board O
N Project Director R
D K
ATMA Management
F
Committee (AMC)
L
P
O
L
W Farm Information & Advisory Centers
Block (FIAC) A
Farmer Advisory Block Technology
Committee (FAC) Team (BTT)
Village
Farmer Interest Groups (FIGs) & Self-Help Groups
Source: Singh and Swanson (2006)
Establishing and Operationalizing ATMAs
The central theme of extension reforms focused on setting up a decentralized system for planning
and delivering extension services at the district level in the form of ATMA. Each ATMA was
provided with a small staff structure that included one Project Director, one Deputy Project
Director, one Accountant, one Establishment Assistant and one Supporting Staff Member,
primarily through redeployment. The Project Directors and Deputy Project Directors were drawn
from different line departments and research organizations, depending upon the priority of the
district. This mechanism has helped in seamless interaction between research and extension and
among all the stakeholders.
There are two sets of mechanisms within the ATMA structure that integrate extension activities
at the district and block levels. The ATMA Management Committee (AMC) decentralizes and
integrates decision-making at the district level while the Block Technology Team (BTT)
organizes and integrates extension activities across each block. The key mechanisms for
“bottom-up” planning and for stakeholder participation in decision-making are the ATMA
Governing Board (AGB) at the district level and the Farmer Advisory Committees (FACs) at the
block level.
As a registered society, ATMA has more flexibility than government line departments. They can
receive funds from both government and non-government sources, enter into contracts, maintain
revolving accounts, charge for services and recover costs from farmers or other service
recipients. In terms of institutional ranking within a district, ATMA ranked above the line
departments; therefore, the Project Director (PD) was able to mobilize extension resources across
all of the line departments—especially extension staff at the district level through a BTT
convener at the block level. In addition, each PD had access to project funds that could be used
for different extension activities as approved by the AGB, headed by the District Collector.
The key to successful project implementation began with project leaders who fully understood
and were committed to implementing the ATMA concept and procedures. In addition, there had
to be effective leaders and managers who could transform these concepts into useful programs,
especially in motivating the BTTs and in activating the farming community.
STRATEGIC PLANNING:
Departing from the traditional top-down practice, the planning process began with the
development of a Strategic Research and Extension Plan (SREP) for each pilot district, which
was prepared at the district level after the systematic assessment of technological gaps, issues,
successes and problems pertaining to various farming systems prevailing in the district.
The district core team, in consultation with the district department heads and scientists of Zonal
Research Stations (ZRSs), identified the major Agro-Ecological Systems (AESs) in each district.
In addition, the major farming systems under each one of the AESs were identified. Then,
representative villages for each of these major farming systems were selected by visiting the
villages under each one of the AESs. The core team was further divided into interdisciplinary
sub-teams depending upon the sectoral requirement of the AES within the district. The data used
to be collected on adoption gaps, technological gaps and institutional gaps by involving different
categories of farmers, including resource-poor and women.
MARKET-DRIVEN E XTENSION:
Strategic planning used to be the first step towards transformation of a “target-driven extension
system” into a “demand-driven extension system”. Participation of farmers on the Governing
Board (GB), the ATMA Management Committee (AMC) and the Farmer Advisory Committees
(FACs) provides the opportunity to identify various problems facing the farming community. In
addition to giving feedback on action plans prepared by extension officials, farmers also used to
bring different issues of wider relevance. In these ways farmers played an important role in
setting extension priorities within the district. With accountability to solve farmers’ problems
and built-in operational flexibility, ATMA makes suitable interventions.
FARMING SYSTEMS APPROACH:
Where possible, farmers undertake more than one enterprise, based on their resource base, to
make their farming more economically viable. To operate more profitably, farmers need to
integrate multiple enterprises, based on their resources, by diversification and intensification. To
make this possible, the strategic planning process promoted in this project focused on the
identification of popular farming systems in various agro-eco situations. This became the basis
for the analysis of gaps in technology adoption, managerial aspects and institutional support
systems.
MOBILIZATION OF COMMUNITIES:
Commodity-oriented Farmer Interest Groups (FIGs) and Self-Help Groups (SHGs) are promoted
at the block/village level to make the technology generation/dissemination both farmer-driven
and farmer-accountable. These village-level FIGs/SHGs are organized at the block/district level
and represented in the Farmer Advisory Committees (FACs) and on the Governing Board (GB).
To address the extension needs of these groups, ATMA has reached out to establish close
linkages with various players operating at the cutting-edge level (i.e., public, private, Non-
Governmental Organizations (NGOs), para extension workers, input dealers, etc.). An effort was
made throughout the pilot project to use a teamwork approach at all levels to bring together
resources and to address farmers' problems in an integrated manner.
PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP:
As the agricultural private sector became increasingly involved in meeting the many demands of
the farming community, a public-private partnership (PPP) between the private sector and
extension provided an opportunity to work together to promote extension efforts. This
partnership has emerged as one of the crucial areas in agricultural extension. For example, a
large number of ATMAs have taken initiatives to develop partnerships with the private sector in
different areas—in the processing industry, farmers’ organizations, cooperatives, corporate
bodies, etc. These partnerships facilitated the dissemination of technologies, the supply of
quality inputs (seed, fertilizers, micro-nutrients, bio-fertilizers, pesticides, bio-pesticides and
other technological tools) and marketing of farmers’ produce.
GENDER SENSITIZATION:
Women’s participation in agriculture has been widely recognized by all the development
agencies, and women farmers were included at every level of ATMA participation. Women were
involved in the decision-making system from the federal level down to the Farmer Advisory
Committees (FACs). Two, non-official members representing the interest of women farmers and
a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) were represented at the federal level. ATMA also was
careful to nominate 30 percent of women representatives on the district Governing Board (GB)
and Farmer Advisory Committees (FACs) at the block level.
In addition to these institutional and technological achievements, these ATMAs have contributed
directly to increased farm income and rural employment through agricultural diversification. For
example, IIM, Lucknow empirically documented the following impacts of the ATMA approach
on the cropping systems and farm income across the 28 project districts during the four-year
period from 1999−2003:
Horticultural cropping area increased from 12 percent to 16 percent.
Oilseed crop area increased from 3 percent to 11 percent.
Herbs, medicinal and aromatic crop areas increased from 1 percent to 5 percent.
Area under cereals (wheat and rice) declined from 55 percent to 47 percent, but yields
increased 14 percent resulting in no appreciable loss in staple food crop production.
Average farm income in project districts increased 24 percent during this four-year
period, in contrast with only 5 percent in non-project districts (Tyagi and Verma, 2004).
Outcomes of the ATMA Model under the Uttar Pradesh Diversified Agricultural
Support Project (UP-DASP)
The Uttar Pradesh Diversified Agricultural Support Project (DASP) was designed to support the
UP government’s attempts to accelerate diversified agricultural growth, which focused on:
Improving the quality and relevance of agricultural technology
Disseminating demand-driven technology
Encouraging private-sector participation, particularly in the farming communities
Expanding rural infrastructure, especially farm-to-market linkage roads and village
marketplaces (haats).
DASP basically remodeled practices that were put in place when food production was the only
goal and the public sector was the only player in service delivery. DASP had a profound effect
because it used a broad and integrated farming systems approach that involved agriculture,
horticulture, dairy and animal husbandry. Moreover, it sought to affect the entire farming
cycle—from the availability of materials and technologies to agronomical practices, productivity,
post-harvest activities, agro-processing, credit and basic rural infrastructure. In all areas,
interventions were demand-driven and need-based. To achieve these ends, the project connected
with the UP line departments and KVKs into Agricultural Technology Management Agencies
(ATMAs) and then coordinated efforts with local Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and
farm communities.
The strategy devised under district-level Strategic Research and Extension Plans (SREPs) to
raise the agriculture productivity was to help farmers by diversifying their crops and increasing
their awareness of new technologies. Encouraging a shift from the traditional paddy-wheat crop
rotation cycle to more remunerative horticultural crops was specified for each area based on the
local agro-eco profile and market demand. Interested farmers were then given cultivation
demonstrations as well as help in how to acquire supplies. Thus, according to an independent
evaluation done by the Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Lucknow, cereals in the DASP
plots dropped from 67.2 percent of the total cropping area (1988-1989) to 55.3 percent (2002-
2003), while the land used for horticulture rose from 13.5 percent (1988-1989) to 16.4 percent
(2002-2003). The net expansion of land under horticulture was 110,000 ha.
The area of western UP, known as the sugar bowl of northern India due to the widespread
production of sugarcane (a water-intensive crop with a long growing cycle), best illustrates how
DASP promoted diversification. Thousands of hectares, where only cane was grown, are now
producing assorted vegetables, fruits and flowers (onions, okra, gladioli, the whole gourd family,
tomatoes, strawberries and even orchards of the exotic loquat). Additionally, as the lines of cane-
laden bullock carts outside sugar factories have shortened, trucks heading for the subzi mandis
(wholesale vegetable markets) have grown.
Similarly, in the Baghpat district, 65 percent of the 107,000 hectares of irrigated cropland was
once devoted solely to cane. Through DASP, 10,000 hectares were weaned away from cane, and
another 14,500 hectares are inter-cropped with onions, cucurbits and marigolds. Where
diversification was not called for, yields were increased through intensive farming techniques.
Farmers were trained to use balanced fertilizers based on scientific soil testing and to substitute
bio-pesticides in place of chemicals. Also, they were encouraged to take up high-yielding seed
varieties and organic manure (like cow pat pits and vermiculture). This program was incredibly
successful. In the DASP area, not only did production costs drop, but crop yields rose.
In short, the Diversified Agricultural Support Project (DASP) through the ATMA model aimed
to create a demand-driven system that involved the community. By treating farmers not only as
intended beneficiaries but also as crucial instruments, DASP formed nearly 18,000 Farmer-
Interest Groups (FIGs) and Self-Help Groups (SHGs), with total memberships of over 300,000
farmers. Farmers with common interests (e.g. dairy, horticulture, or another particular enterprise,
such as mushrooms) were encouraged to form groups. While the groups began as savings-and-
loans societies (each contributed savings on a regular basis), they became important avenues for
disseminating information on new technologies. In western Uttar Pradesh (UP), many crop-
specific groups were formed. In the Mavi Kalan village, the subject of onions brought nearly 100
farmers together; in Pali it was radishes, in Daula it was fenugreek and in Johri it was
cauliflower. In all groups, farmers shared information on their problems and priorities.
Responding to the farmers’ needs, the line departments and Non-Governmental Organizations
(NGOs) secured the technology and inputs, and demonstrated how to apply them.
Also, the DASP team helped to (a) procure new high-yielding seeds, (b) create nurseries for
early sowing and (c) develop marketing practices that would bring higher returns. In turn, these
farmers trained others. In all, 17,906 groups were formed, of which 6,247 were women’s groups.
The specific features of SHGs were:
Total savings for the groups were Rs 184.6 million
80 percent of the groups engaged in income-generating activities
8,504 groups accessed credit from commercial banks
In short, the ATMA model, as implemented through DASP was equally successful in
comparison with the ATMA model under the NATP project.
Nationwide Implementation and Up-Scaling of the ATMA Model
The ATMA model was essentially pilot tested during the NATP and UP-DASP projects from
1998 to 2005. Subsequently, it was decided to expand this approach to cover a wider area, based
on the fact that the strategy that had been used had clearly resulted in significant increases in
farmers’ incomes. ATMA is currently being implemented in 603 districts based on the success of
this model that was implemented in 28 NATP and 35 DASP districts in Uttar Pradesh. Certain
structural and functional changes have taken place affecting how ATMA conducts its affairs,
such as sanctioning of state extension work plans at state level by the State-Level Sanctioning
Committee (SLSC), providing staff/labor support from state level to village level, expanding the
scope of an assortment of activities, enhancing fund allocation and converging and integrating all
development programs within the domain of ATMA.
The State Extension Work Plan (SEWP) document has emerged as the blueprint for state
agricultural development, encompassing all the issues relating to production, research,
processing, value addition and marketing through Strategic Research and Extension Plans
(SREPs) and Comprehensive District Agricultural Plan (CDAPs). A significant change in the
current ATMA model is the allocation of specific budget lines for mainstreaming gender and
public-private partnership concerns. This policy change will certainly facilitate capital inflow
and resource sharing to generate wealth in the agriculture sector. Also, a large number of
extension professionals are being trained with more useful knowledge and skill sets, and they are
empowered with a positive attitude to carry out these extension reforms. With these current
changes in place, the district-level ATMA is expected to become the single, most vibrant
institution providing a useful connection between farmers, research, extension and other service
providers and stakeholders. The shift from top-down, central planning to a bottom-up,
farmer/stakeholder-involved planning strategy is being accomplished. Equally important is the
shift to a more market-driven extension system that fully supports farmers’ efforts to increase
farm income and rural employment. There is usefulness and energy in the ATMA model, as
channels are forged and connections made and remade between producers, the private sector,
researchers and extension workers, who are now serving their clients in ways that were not
possible before the introduction of the ATMA model.
By 2006, ATMA had extended to some 60 district, intended to function nationwide within 5
years (Singh and Swanson, 2006). However, bottlenecks began to emerge. Kapoor (2010)
explain a lack of qualified local manpower; delivery mechanisms; technical and financial
support, and a clean framework for partnerships. He also points to weak linkages between
ATMA, ICAR, SAUs and KVKs. Government issued new guidelines on ATMA in 2010 aim to
strengthen specialists and functioning support at different levels. Farmers field model—need to
make certain for linking the farmers and extension agent workers in practice for filling the block
level gaps. List of extension activities revised; strengthen the farmers’ advisory committees that
lead to allocation of ATMA funds shows new organisational pattern.
The new guidelines hold up convergence in 4 areas; extension under different programs, public
agricultural research and extension, between development departments, and with the non-
governmental sector. The latter area includes public-private partnership. At least 10% of district
allocation is meant to run outside the government sector. As well as NGOs and farmer
organisations, this, for example, includes input suppliers (Govt. of India, 2010). The guidelines
also attempts to increase responsiveness to farmer’s needs. The implementation quality varies
state to state. Challenges include the sheer scale and complexity, instilling a culture of
accountability to farmers in a multi-tier organisation, alignment between knowledge generation
and extension, and the dependence of extension’s impact on the broader policy environment
(Ferroni and Zhou, 2013).
The unpublished evaluations of ATMA extension criticise many aspects in some states. They
include insufficient percolation of the planning process down to village level, insufficient
attention to extension in districts, poor mobilisation of farmers and community interest groups,
failure to link district ATMA structure to the corresponding KVK, slow release of funds, and
neglect of possible synergies (Ferroni and Zhou, 2013).
CONCLUSIONS
Present public extension system faces the major challenges in extension. Indian pluralistic
extension system involves public and non-public institutions working at national, state and
district level. It includes various institutions, i.e., ICAR, SAUs, private sector, semi-autonomous
and autonomous bodies, civil society institutions etc. This situation puts heavy responsibilities on
the national level extension department for the policy guidance, coordination, and quality of
program. There are three major issues before Indian extension systems: First, how to improve the
effectiveness of extension systems? Second, how to serve the small land holders and marginal
farmers in diversified farming systems? And, third, how to allocate sufficient funds and provide
efficient human resource management.
The ATMA model has been very successful in addressing many extension problems. Hence,
ATMA model should be introduced and implemented vigilantly. ATMAs should be empowered
with sufficient administrative, financial and implementation flexibilities to reach the large
numbers of small and marginal farmers. There is need of coordinated attempt to synergize and
converge efforts at district and block levels to improve the performance of stakeholders. It is
essential to route all the state and central government extension funds and human resources
through a single agency (i.e. ATMA), for effective utilization of crucial resources. The state
governments should provide proper financial support by allocating at least 20% of states total
budget should be allocated to ATMA, which in turn distributes among state departments. Also,
the development grant provided by ICAR to agricultural universities and KVKs should be
reviewed and adequately enhanced.
For serving the small communities efficiently, ICTs could be useful tools to increase the
connectivity between the various FIGs/SHGs and extension approaches as private extension has
much in-depth presence. Scaling up of FIGs/SHGs and Farmers Associations (FAs) could be an
effective mechanism for empowerment and transfer of agricultural technologies. It will also
reduce extension cost and the workload of extension functionaries. Research–Extension–Farmer
linkage can be best served through the efficient linkages among technology generation,
dissemination and adoption.
For transforming agriculture through innovative approaches and methodologies, KVKs (at
district level) are exhibiting sincere efforts in functioning knowledge and resource center and
also strengthening their linkages with other stakeholders. Hence need to bestow with adequate
manpower and resources for efficient functioning.
REFERENCES
Birner, R. and Anderson, J. (2007). How to make agricultural extension demand-driven? The
case of India’s agricultural extension policy. Discussion Paper 00729.Washington D.C.,
International Food Policy Research Institute.
DAC, (2010). National Seminar on Agriculture Extension Proceedings, Department of
Agriculture and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi,
February 27-28, 2009. DARE and ICAR, (2006). Report of the Committee on
Independent Evaluation and Impact Assessment of Krishi Vigyan Kendras in India,
DARE and ICAR, New Delhi.
Economic Survey, Govt. of India (2009-10). Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic
Affairs, Economic Division, Feb., 2010. Oxford University Press, New Delhi.
Federer, G., Birner, R., & Anderson, J.R. (2011). The private sector’s role in agricultural
extension systems: Potential and limitations, Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and
Emerging Economies, 1(i):31-54.
Ferroni, M and Zhou, Yuan (2013). Achievements and challenges in agricultural extension in
India. Global Journal of Emerging Market Economies, 4(3):319-346.
Glendenning, Claire J., Babu, Suresh and Kwadwo Asenso-Okyere (2010). Review of
Agricultural Extension in India: Are Farmers’ Information Needs Being Met? IFPRI
Discussion Paper 01048, Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute.
ICAR (1979). Golden Jubilee Souvenir.
India, DAC Annual Report (2011-12). Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, Ministry
of Agriculture, Government of India. March 2012. http://www.agricoop.nic.in
(accessed on 01.12.2012).
ICAR, Annual Reports (Various years 1990 onwards), New Delhi.
ICAR (1996). ICAR Now and Ahead, New Delhi.
ICAR (2005-06). Budget Book, New Delhi.
Jha, D. and Kumar, S. (2006). Research resource allocation in Indian agriculture. Policy Paper
No. 23. Delhi, National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research.
Kumar, P. and Rosegrant, M. W. (1994).Productivity and sources of growth for rice in India,
Economic and Political Weekly, Dec. 31, pp 183-188.
Kokate, K.D. (2009). Changing perspective in agricultural extension—KVK as knowledge and
resource center. Proceedings of Fourth National Conference on Krishi Vigyan Kendra. pp
49-56.
Kokate, K.D. (2010). Changing Perspective of Agricultural Extension in India KVK–A
Knowledge and Resource Centre, paper presented in Global Conference on Research and
Development at Montpellier, France During March 28-31,2010.
Meena, M S, Bhagwat V R, Jain R K & Ilyas, S. M. (2003). Self-Help Group: An Effective
Instrument for Transfer of Technology. CIPHET Extension Bulletin-1. Central Institute
of Post-Harvest Engineering & Technology, Ludhiana, India.
Meena, M. S, Jain Dilip and Meena, H. R. (2008). Measurement of attitudes of rural women
towards self-help groups. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 14 (3):
217-229.
Meena, M. S. and Singh, K. M. (2011). Measurement of attitudes of rural poor towards SHGs in
Bihar, India, presented in international conference on innovative approaches for
agricultural knowledge management: global extension experiences organized by
International Society of Extension Education, Nagpur and Indian Council of Agricultural
Research at the NASC Complex, New Delhi. pp. 402.
Mohapatra, S. and Sahoo, B. K (2008). Agricultural Research and Development in India: Trends,
Patterns, Determinant and Policy Implication. Available at:
www.ignou.ac.in/schools/soss/FINAL_SOSS_CONFERENCE/full_%20papers/A3/Sima
ntini%20&%20B.k.%20Sahoo-2.pdf
Pardey, P. G., and J. Roseboom (1989). ISNAR agricultural research indicator series.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Planning Commission (2008).XIth Five Year Plan (2007–12). Ministry of Finance, Government
of India, New Delhi.
Planning Commission (2010). Mid-term Appraisal XI Plan, Planning Commission for
Agriculture, Government of India (Accessed on 05.05.2010).
Pal, S., and A. Singh. (1997). Agricultural research and extension in India: Institutional structure
and investments, Policy Paper-7, New Delhi: National Centre for Agricultural Economics
and Policy Research.
Raabe, K. (2008). Reforming the agricultural extension system in India: What do we know about
what works where and why? IFPRI Discussion Paper 00775. Washington, D.C.:
International Food Policy Research Institute.
Ramasamy, C. and Selvaraj, K. N. (2007). Prioritizing Agricultural Research and Extension,
INRM Policy Brief No. 15, Asian Development Bank.
Reddy, M. N., and Swanson, B.E. (2006). Strategy for up-scaling the ATMA model in India. In
Proceedings of the Association for International Agricultural and Extension
Education(AIAEE) 22nd Annual Conference, Clearwater Beach, Florida, U.S.A.
Report of working group on agriculture research and education for the eleventh for the five year
plan (2007-2012). Government of India, Planning Commission. (http://dare.nic.in)
Singh, J.P., Swanson, B.E. & Singh, K.M. (2006). Developing a decentralized, market-driven
extension system in India: The ATMA model. In A.W. van den Ban and R.K. Samanta,
eds. changing roles of agricultural extension in Asian nations, pp. 203–223. Delhi, B.R.
Publishing.
Singh, K. M., and B. Swanson. 2006. Developing market-driven extension system in India.
Proceedings of the Association for International Agricultural and Extension Education,
ed. J. R. Vreyens. AIAEE 22nd Annual Conference, Clearwater Beach, Florida, U.S.A.
Singh, K. M., Swanson, B. E., Jha, A. K. and Meena, M. S. (2012). Extension Reforms and
Innovations in Technology Dissemination-The ATMA Model in India (October 30,
2012). (Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2168642).
Swanson, B.E. and Mathur, P. N. (2003). Review of the Agricultural Extension System in India,
The World Bank, July 2003.
Swanson, B.E. (2006). The changing role of agricultural extension in a global economy. Journal
of International Agricultural and Extension Education 13(3): 5–17.
Swanson, B.E. 2008. Global Review of Good Agricultural Extension and Advisory Service
Practices. Rome: FAO. ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/i0261e/i0261e00.pdf (also in
many languages)
Swanson, B.E. and R. Rajalahti. 2010. Strengthening Agricultural Extension and Advisory
Systems. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTARD/Resources/Stren_combined_web.pdf
Working Group on Agricultural Extension (2007). Recommendations of working group on
agricultural extension for formulation of eleventh five-year plan (2007–12). New Delhi:
Planning Commission.
Chapter-3
EXTENSION BY STATE AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITIES (SAUs)
BACKGROUND
Agricultural research and education are the backbone of agricultural extension system in any country
as they not only provide a sound knowledge base for extension workers but also support by
developing new technologies on a concurrent basis to feed the national extension systems of a
country. They provide crucial qualified manpower for the extension systems and help in building
their capacities through their various programmes and initiatives. Indian agricultural research and
education system needs a fresh look in light of the emerging technological challenges like climate
change scenario, ever growing population and burden to feed more than a billion people during the
21 st century. State Agricultural Universities (SAUs) in India, were envisaged to provide the much
needed leadership to agricultural research and extension system to meet the overall goal of providing
food and livelihood security to its population and to work for overall upliftment of the agricultural
sector in the country through their three main mandates, namely, education, research and extension.
The agricultural education and research system however works in perfect harmony with the other
extension systems prevailing in the country. SAUs play a major role in fulfilling their mandate of
fulfilling crucial manpower requirements of the pluralistic extension system along with providing
technological backstopping through their Directorates of Extension and various faculties imparting
education to meet the ever growing need of various sectors. Discussed below are the SAUs, their
evolution, mandates, functions, and activities which help the pluralistic extension system in India.
The performance of KVKs is monitored and reviewed at various levels including the SAUs, through
the Directorate of Extension Education headed by Director of Extension Education who monitors the
functioning of KVKs. The Director of Extension Education is also responsible to provide
technological backstopping and overseeing the activities of KVKs, irrespective of the who control
the day to day functioning, i.e. SAUs, NGOs or ICAR institutions in the area under the jurisdiction
of that particular SAU. At the ICAR headquarters, the Division of Agricultural Extension monitors
and reviews the functioning of the KVKs through ZPDs. As most of the Krishi Vigyan Kendras
(KVKs) in India though fully funded by Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) are under
the administrative control of SAUs. It is imperative to discuss them separately to have a better
understanding of their multi-faceted role in pluralistic extension system in India.
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE STATE AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITIES
In its early phases, the Indian agricultural education system was in the domain of public-funded
general universities. Agricultural research and education received major support in the first decade
of the 20th century when Lord Curzon was the Viceroy of India. By 1905, only six agricultural
colleges had been established in Pune (Maharashtra), Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh), Sabour (Bihar),
Nagpur (Maharashtra), Faisalabad (now in Pakistan) and Coimbatore (Tamil Nadu) with annual
funding of Rs. 2 million by the government of India. These colleges were adequately equipped with
staff and laboratories and mandated with research and teaching initiatives. In 1926, the Royal
Commission placed emphasis on the importance of a strong research base for agricultural
development in India.
The most significant milestone was the establishment of the Imperial (now Indian) Agricultural
Research Institute (IARI) at Pusa (Bihar) in 1905, however due to a severe earthquake in 1934, the
Pusa institute was shifted to New Delhi in 1936. The Royal Commission established the autonomous
Imperial (now Indian) Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) in 1929. It was mandated to
promote, guide and coordinate agricultural research with a non-lapsing fund of Rs. 5 million. The
establishment of the ICAR empowered agricultural research in India. However, the ICAR had no
administrative control on research institutions in the provinces.
At the time of independence in 1947, only 17 agricultural and veterinary colleges were established to
focus on training of students in agriculture, whereas the State Departments of Agriculture and
Community Development focused on research and extension. There were no close linkages between
agricultural colleges and research departments to ensure maximum utilization of proven
technologies. Instead of costly agricultural education and limited resources, regional interests
pressed for the establishment of a large number of new agricultural colleges during the early post-
independence period.
From 1953 to 1960, the number of agriculture/veterinary colleges almost doubled. In spite of
inadequate financial support, rapid spread of agricultural colleges affiliated with traditional
universities led in the downward slide of standards in education, which became a serious problem.
Accordingly, the pace of progress remained slow, and production technology developed at these
institutions did not keep pace with the fast changing requirements. Therefore, it was realized that
both the system of education as well as the set-up of the agriculture/animal sciences institutions
needed to be reorganized to serve as an effective vehicle for agricultural progress and development.
This necessitated a review of the existing system of agricultural education.
Recognizing the weakness of the then existing educational system and need for linking programs of
agricultural education with production programs, the University Education Commission (1948)
headed by Dr. S. Radhakrishnan suggested the establishment of “Rural Universities.” This
recommendation was strengthened by the proposals made by two Joint Indo-American Teams (1955
and 1960), which endorsed the establishment of SAUs.
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and American land-grant
universities helped with the development of SAUs in India. In some developing countries, especially
in Asia, agricultural research and education is organized under an autonomous agricultural university
based on the pattern of the land-grant universities in the United States of America. The SAUs of
India, Pakistan and the Philippines are based on this model as well.
In India, the first SAU was established in 1960 at Pantnagar in Uttar Pradesh. The SAUs were given
autonomous status and direct funding from the state governments. They were autonomous
organizations with state-wide responsibility for agricultural research, education and training or
extension education. The establishment of the SAUs, based on a pattern similar to that of the land-
grant universities in the United States, was a landmark in reorganizing and strengthening the
agricultural education system in India. These universities became the branches of research under the
ICAR and became the partners of the National Agricultural Research System (NARS). The green
revolution, with its impressive social and economic impact, witnessed significant contributions from
the SAUs, both in terms of trained, scientific work force and the generation of new technologies.
The SAUs are headed by a Vice-Chancellor, governed by a board and advised by an advisory
committee. The governing boards of the SAUs have representatives from government, farmers and
agri-business. Being autonomous organizations, they are able to effectively integrate research and
education and carry out their mandate. The SAUs receive core funds for research and education from
the state governments and substantial grants from the national agricultural research council or
national institutes. The second National Education Commission (1964-66), at that time headed by
the University Grant Commission Chairman, Dr. D. S. Kothari, recommended the establishment of
at least one agricultural university in each Indian state. These universities imparted education on all
aspects of agriculture on the same residential campus and integrated teaching with research and
extension.
Programs giving specialized training to the rural youth and adult men and women who are not
candidates for degrees, through departments involved in responsibility for the subject matter being
taught. To accomplish these commitments, there is a need for adequate and efficient extension to be
set up for the speedy and effective communication of new knowledge and technology to extension
agents and to farmers. As agriculture plays a very important role in the Indian economy, setting up
an adequate number of agricultural universities was considered very important. However, the
responsibility for extension rests with the Department of Agriculture and Cooperation (DAC) and
the Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (DADF), which are under the Central
Ministry of Agriculture.
CURRENT STATUS
The SAUs are the major partners in growth and development of agricultural research and education
under the NARS. All important states have at least one SAU, and most of the SAUs are multi-
campus universities. Some states have established new SAUs by elevating an old campus to the
university level. Although efforts were made to establish the ICAR, institutions in the major
production state for the mandated commodity, there appears to be some influence of political-
economic factors. For instance, a large number of institutions were established in the northern and
southern states—the states having larger representation in the Union Ministry of Agriculture.
Meanwhile, western and north-eastern states were given low priority.
Research collaboration with the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR)
System, NARS and research foundations overseas, etc. is operationalized by the ICAR through the
Department of Agricultural Research and Education (DARE). However, SAUs can also directly
collaborate with these international organizations. Linkages with the national and private research
organizations are direct. Public research institutions extend support by activities such as supplying
germplasm and training facilities to the private sector. Over a period of time, agricultural universities
in India have grown and to-date the list of SAUs, central universities, deemed-to-be universities and
central universities with agricultural faculty is as follows:
DEEMED-TO-BE UNIVERSITIES
Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa, New Delhi
Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh
National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana
Central Institute of Fisheries Education, Mumbai, Maharashtra
Allahabad Agricultural Institute, Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh
As per mandate, a Scientific Advisory Committee is constituted at each KVK for assessing,
reviewing and guiding their programs and progress. The members of this committee comprise a
cross-section of scientific and farming communities—representatives of both government and non-
government organizations who are directly or indirectly involved in the process of agricultural
training, production and development. The ATIC is a constituent unit of the directorate which
serves as a single-window delivery system to help farmers and other stake holders by providing
solutions to location-specific problems and making all technological information, along with
technology inputs, available. The organizational set up and extension mechanism of the DoEE is
presented in Figures 3.1 and 3.2 (on the next page).
MASS MEDIA
Among various extension methods, the use of media is useful in creating awareness and stimulating
interest, along with large coverage of the audience (Hussain, 1997; Okunade, 2007). New and
improved agricultural technologies, developed in Agricultural Research Institutes, universities, the
private sector and often by the farmers themselves, have to be disseminated among the masses in
order to increase productivity and overcome hunger and poverty. In this context, farmers need
adequate exposure to information on technologies that may be available. Research has shown that
by-and-large farmers’ exposure to information is an important factor influencing their technology
adoption behavior. In South Asian countries, including India, it is primarily the public extension
services that are mandated to disseminate new agricultural technologies.
The usual mechanism of technology dissemination is from research to extension; and extension, in
turn, passes on the messages to the end-users (research-extension-farmers). The process is
constrained in several ways: (i) the role of the media is not high on the agenda, and mass media are
not usually considered in technology transfer programs, (ii) the dissemination process is constrained
where the research-extension linkage is weak, (iii) the technology transfer process, being primarily
dependent on the physical presence of the extension worker, is limited in scale and is often slow.
The involvement of mass media in technology transfer can seemingly help overcome these
constraints. Print media such as newspapers, magazines, leaflets, booklets, posters and handbills are
widely used in technology transfer by the DoEE. Agricultural technology supplements are published
along with daily or weekly newspapers by most of the SAUs or the DoEE. Agricultural
periodicals/magazines or technical bulletins are often used for disseminating agricultural technology
information among farmers by most of these institutions.
Training Courses: The DOEE organizes national-level training programs, workshops and seminars
for promoting the professional competency of the officials and extension personnel working in
different line departments of government. Major training areas include oilseeds and pulses, cropping
system approach, seed production technology, post-harvest technology, integrated pest management,
arid horticulture, micro-irrigation systems, etc.
State-Level Training Courses: The directorate organizes short-term training courses for subject
matter specialists of line departments on subjects like integrated pest management, organic farming,
vermi-compost, women in agriculture, aromatic and medicinal plants, etc. In these courses, the
officials are exposed to emerging problems and their possible solutions as well as recent
technological advances.
Faculty Development Training under Technical Backstopping: Scientists of the DOEE are
provided trainings with the purpose of updating skills required for work effectiveness and efficiency.
In recent years, scientists have been trained in the areas of on-farm testing, post-harvest
management, tally accounting, impact studies, etc.
Agri-Clinics and Agri-Business Training: The DOEE is one of the recognized centres for agri-
clinics and agri-business trainings in the country. These trainings are sponsored by the Ministry of
Agriculture and Cooperation, (Government of India, New Delhi). With these trainings, the DoEE is
providing 60-day training those not yet employed in the agriculture sector. The purpose of such
training is to teach entrepreneurial and managerial skills to agricultural graduates so as to enable
them to establish their own enterprises and provide jobs to others as well. Major areas where
participants established their own business are bio-fertilizers and bio-pesticide production, rural
storage structures (“godown”), agricultural input marketing, custom hiring, fruit and ornamental
plant nurseries, agri-clinics, retail shops, etc.
Training Programs for Farmers and Farm Women: The directorate is organizing inter-state and
state-level short-term courses for practicing farmers and farm women on crop production,
horticulture, plant protection, animal production, home science and other related disciplines. These
training programs are sponsored by line departments of agriculture, horticulture, soil water
conservation and NGOs. These trainings not only provide the participants practical exposure but also
give an opportunity for participants to raise their incomes by adopting new technologies. These
trainings are organized on the principles of "Learning by Doing" and “Seeing is Believing.”
HUMAN RESOURCES IN THE I NDIAN RESEARCH AND EXTENSION SYSTEM
The country has one of the largest and most complex agricultural research systems in the world.
Public-sector research institutes still form the backbone of the Indian agricultural research system,
despite the rapid emergence of other types of research institutions. The majority of the agricultural
scientists in India work for government agencies. Most of them are engaged with the triple function
of education, research and extension. Since precise and consistent estimates of scientific staff in the
ICAR/ SAU system over time are not available, the rough estimations made by Pal et.al., (1997), and
Ramaswamy and Selvraj (2007) approximate the number of scientists working in the ICAR/SAU
system during the late 1980s to be 4,189 scientists in ICAR and 14,851 scientists in the SAUs,
giving a total scientific strength of 19,040. The number of scientists remained steady in the ICAR
during the 1990s (4,092 in 1998) and increased marginally to 4609 in 2005-2006 (DARE/ICAR,
2006). However, numbers decreased significantly in the SAUs (17,678 in 1992). It has declined by
24 percent in the last decade (Ramaswamy and Selvraj, 2007) because of non-replacement of retiring
faculty and restrictions on recruitment.
Adjusting the number of scientists by share of research expenditure relative to extension and
education (for ICAR) and percent time spent on research (for SAUs), the number of full-time
scientists in the late 1990s was 2,999 in ICAR and 8,132 in SAUs, giving a total of 11,131 full-time
researchers in the country and making it one of the largest agricultural Research and Development
(R&D) system in the world. This is a substantial increase from an estimated 5,666 full-time
researchers in the ICAR/SAU system in 1975, and 8,389 in 1985 (Pardey and Roseboom, 1989).
However, the investment of Rs. 4.20 lakh per scientist in 2001-2002 was a decrease from Rs. 4.32
lakh2 during 1992–1994. Scientists’ intensity per 1000 hectares of gross cropped area was 8.34
during 1992–1994 and declined to 5.90 in 2001-2002. In 2005-2006 the agricultural scientists of the
ICAR institutes were supported by a large technical staff (7355), administrative staff (4705) and
supporting staff (9067). However, the ICAR as well as the SAUs are downsizing the administrative
staff to balance the ratio of scientific staff to supporting staff.
2
10 Lakh= 1 Million
and extension is the main source of growth in agricultural total-factor productivity in India, and the
rates of return are impressive (Evenson and McKinsey, 1991; Rosegrant and Evenson, 1992; Kumar
and Rosegrant, 1994).
The Union Government of India supports the ICAR, the apex body of agricultural research,
extension and education in the country. In addition to financing the ICAR institutes and research
centers, a part of the fund is allotted to the SAUs in the form of research programs and annual grants
(ICAR Budget Book, 2005-2006). The SAUs are supported by the respective state governments.
Some state government funds are also used to support research in public organizations like Agro-
economic Research Centers and commodity research stations outside the ICAR and SAU system.
Mohapatra and Sahoo (2008) studied the trend in public funding (center and state governments) of
agricultural research and education. A perusal of the study reveals an increasing trend in the
investment. Investment in public research and education reached Rs. 500.30 crore by 1980-1981
from Rs.160.10 crore in 1960-1961. After 1980-1981 this funding went sky-high and reached
Rs.2196.98 crore in 2004-2005, a more than tenfold increase in the last four decades, albeit at only
0.30 percent of agricultural Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Ag.GDP) in recent years.
It is clear that there is a consistent increase in the funding of agricultural research and education in
India. A break-down of the total investment by center and state governments (Table- 3.1) shows that
investments made by both the governments showed an increasing trend except for 1970-1971 where
the center’s share in the total investment remained as low as 3.3%. Funding from the state
accelerated during the 1960s and 1970s because of the establishment of a large number of SAUs
during that period. Central government investment increased consistently thereafter, and during
2004-2005 it surpassed the state government investment. The central government’s effort to
strengthen and empower the decentralized research and education system is one of the prime reasons
for its increased investment in research and education in the country.
Education
The changes in agricultural research investment by center and state governments are substantiated by
the compound growth rates in each period in Table 3.3. It shows that public expenditure on research
and education in India grew at 5.54% from 1960-70, 54.02 %from 1971-1980, 5.38% from 1981-
1990 and 7.18% from 1991-2004. The phases of change in the real investment correspond to
organizational changes in the research and education system. State research and education funding
stagnated or declined marginally in almost all the states during the last two decades. From 1971-
1980 it grew rapidly because of the establishment of several SAUs during this period in many states.
Table 3.1: Intensity of Agricultural Research Investment in India at Constant
(1993-1994) Prices.
Funding / ha (Rs.) Funding / Agri. Worker (Rs.) Funding as percent
States of Ag. GDP
1981-1983 1991-1993 2001-2003 1981-1983 1991-1993 2001-2003 981-1983 1991-1993 2001-2003
A P 19.09 37.99 59.93 13.29 19.39 27.76 0.14 0.23 0.27
Assam 88.08 79.06 98.20 NA 39.29 54.28 0.28 0.39 0.44
Bihar 15.04 30.82 73.95 7.12 10.00 16.40 0.12 0.21 0.28
Gujarat 19.56 39.58 58.91 28.49 36.88 51.44 0.17 0.34 0.38
Haryana 45.53 74.95 125.40 73.48 84.64 103.59 0.34 0.32 0.486
Karnataka 14.96 23.08 57.86 17.43 25.72 43.72 0.16 0.24 0.34
Kerala 70.15 18.2 171.19 54.39 89.49 159.85 0.29 0.44 0.55
MP 3.48 92.89 21.76 4.29 9.77 15.12 0.06 0.16 0.23
Maharashtra 27.94 44.83 74.13 33.86 37.22 57.47 0.38 0.41 0.55
Orissa 10.08 19.35 20.84 9.48 13.66 13.01 0.09 0.18 0.17
Punjab 53.52 88.76 122.62 78.56 105.42 146.44 0.27 0.29 0.33
Rajasthan 6.30 13.71 21.91 13.28 17.58 20.97 0.13 0.20 0.24
T N 23.27 70.09 125.06 11.52 27.53 43.80 0.17 0.33 0.47
U P 18.95 26.54 32.42 13.57 13.84 15.19 0.14 0.16 0.14
W B 32.72 33.98 58.87 21.32 15.66 24.72 0.21 0.12 0.14
Average 39.81 65.53 116.67 26.48 23.81 32.86 0.19 0.25 0.30
ALL 81.39 59.06 60.31 93.23 86.00 86.14 46.51 35.09 41.73
All the extension activities of the SAUs are implemented and coordinated by the Director of
Extension. The mandated extension role of the SAUs was effective in establishing functional
research extension linkages under the T&V system, which is considered the most significant
extension management system in India during the mid-1970s (Feder and Slade, 1986). It was well
suited to the rapid dissemination of crop management practices for the high yielding wheat and rice
varieties released in India since the mid-1960s. The system largely operated in the interpersonal
mode and enabled the professionalism in agricultural technology transfer in India (Picciotto and
Anderson, 1997). It helped to evaluate and perfect the two-step communication model in farm
technology dissemination through the effective use of progressive farmers as change agents.
However, with the withdrawal of World Bank assistance, the T&V system became dysfunctional in
almost all the states of the country. The issues of scale, ineffective interaction with the agricultural
research systems, inability to attribute benefits, weak accountability and lack of political support
attributed to its decline (Anderson et. al., 2006).
Although the post T&V-period saw the emergence of many extension reforms, the role of university
extension in the changed scenario was seldom addressed. Most of the changes worked on the
limitations of the T & V approach and were aimed at restructuring the extension system followed by
the state DOA into a decentralized and farmer-accountable model. As part of this, many innovations
that promoted private agro-service providers, fostered a group approach, used broad-based extension
to address marketing issues and innovative uses of media and information technology were tried
through the state DOA and NGOs in many parts of the country (Sulaiman, 2003). However, the
field-level impact of many of these reforms has been highly uneven and inadequate as it required the
coordination of different line departments over which the implementing agency had no control.
Reduced funding and a shift in national priorities away from agriculture during the liberalization of
the economy also impeded the effective implementation and duplication of even the successful
models on a large scale.
The state governments must ensure proper financial support to the agricultural universities by
allocating to them at least 15% of the total budget of the departments of agriculture, animal
husbandry, fishery, horticulture, forestry and any others related to agriculture. The central and state
governments may devise a mechanism to provide, to respective agricultural universities, a lump-sum
grant as a core fund to be used in the future, exclusively for the maintenance and renewal of existing
infrastructure facilities on campus. This will mitigate the effects of uncertain funding. The
development grant provided by the ICAR to agricultural universities under plan allocation should be
reviewed and adequately enhanced.
Even in recent years with the advent of the ATMA as a national extension model to implement
location-specific programs related to agricultural development, the SAUs have been restricted to
consultancy roles (MANAGE 1999; Reddy and Swanson, 2006). However, the emerging socio-
economic scenario and change in knowledge structure of agriculture explicitly indicate that the
traditional agricultural research and extension roles of the SAUs alone cannot sufficiently address
the challenges of the new trends in agricultural development. A suitable mechanism is required for
periodic assessment of the scientific and technical work force requirement for agricultural Research
and Development (R&D) institutions in the country. This will help maintain a reasonable balance
between the work force generated and opportunities for their gainful employment.
REFERENCES
Albarran, A.B. (2002). Management of Electronic Media (2nd Ed.). Wadsworth, Thomson Learning,
USA.
Anonymous (2002). India Vision 2020, Planning Commission, Government of India, New Delhi,
pp1-118.
Davison, R. M., R.W. Harris, S. Qureshi, D. R. Vogel, and G.H. de Vreede, (Eds.). (2005).
Information Systems in Developing Countries: Theory and Practice, City University of Hong Kong
Press, pp. 289.
Evenson, R. E., C. Pray, and M. W. Rosegrant (1999). Agricultural research and productivity growth
in India, IFPRI Research Report No. 109. Washington, D.C. International Food Policy Research
Institute.
Fliegel, F.C. (1984). Extension communication and adoption process. In: Swanson B.E. (ed.)
Agricultural Extension: A Reference Manual, FAO, Rome.
Hussain, M. (1997). Mass media. In: Memon, R.A. and E. Bashir (Eds.) Extension Methods.
National Book Foundation, Islamabad. pp. 209-261.
ICAR (1997). Training, Consultancy, Contract Research and Contract Service in ICAR System-
Rules and Guidelines, New Delhi.
Jones, G.E. (1997).The history, development and the future of agricultural extension’ in B.E.
Swanson, R.P. Bentz and A.J. Sofranko (1997) Improving agricultural extension-a reference manual.
Rome: FAO.
Kumar, P. and M. W. Rosegrant (1994). Productivity and sources of growth for rice in India,
Economic and Political Weekly, Dec. 31, pp 183-188.
Meera, Shaik N., A. Jhamtani, and D.U.M. Rao. (2004). Information and communication technology
in agricultural development: a comparative analysis of three projects from India. AgREN Network
Paper No.135, ODI, January 2004.20p. Available at:
www.odi.org.uk/agren/papers/agrenpaper_135.pdf
Mohapatra, S. and Sahoo, B. K (2008). Agricultural Research and Development in India: Trends,
Patterns, Determinant and Policy Implication. Presented in International Conference on Issues in
Public Policy and Sustainable Development at IGNOU held at New Delhi, during March 26-28,
2008. pp. 1-22. Available at:
www.ignou.ac.in/schools/soss/FINAL_SOSS_CONFERENCE/full_%20papers/A3/Simantini%20&
%20B.k.%20Sahoo-2.pdf
NAAS (1999). Reorienting Land Grant System of Agricultural Education in India. Policy Paper-6,
pp. 1-6.
Pal, S., and A. Singh. (1997). Agricultural research and extension in India: Institutional structure and
investments, Policy Paper 7, New Delhi: National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy
Research.
Qamar, M. K. (2005). Modernizing National Agricultural Extension Systems: A Practical Guide for
Policy-Makers of Developing Countries. FAO, Rome, Italy. http://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/008/
a0219e/a0219e00.pdf. Accessed on 16 July 2009.
Ramasamy C. and Selvaraj, K. N. (2007). Prioritizing Agricultural Research and Extension, INRM
Policy Brief No. 15, Asian Development Bank.
Randhawa, M. S. (1968). Agricultural universities in India; progress and problems. Report submitted
to The Agricultural Division of the National Association of state Universities and Land Grant
Colleges at Washington on November 12, 1968.
Rivera, W. M. (2000). Confronting global market: public sector agricultural extension reconsidered
[abstr.]. J. Ext. Sys., 16 (2): 33-54.
Zijp, W. (1994). Improving the transfer and use of agricultural information-a guide to Information
Technology. Washington DC: World Bank.
CHAPTER-4
PRIVATE SECTOR ADVISORY SERVICES
M.N. Reddy
The government of India’s National Agriculture Policy (2000) envisions that “Private sector
participation will be promoted through contract farming and leasing arrangements to allow
accelerated technology transfer, capital inflow and assured market for crop production,
especially of oilseeds, cotton and horticultural crops.” Farming is an age-old means of livelihood
for millions of Indians. However, there have been few systems/models in which farmers are
assured of a market for their produce, let alone a remunerative price. Farmers have on occasion
have thrown their produce away due to a lack of buyers. This is one side of the coin. On the
other side is the agri-based food industry, which requires timely and adequate inputs of good
quality agricultural produce. This underlying paradox of the Indian agricultural scenario has
given birth to the concept of “contract farming,” which promises to provide a proper linkage
between the farm and market. Recognizing the need for and merits of such a linkage with the
farming/producing community, several corporations involved in agro-commodity trading,
processing, exports, etc. have attempted to establish convenient systems that ensure timely and
consistent supply of raw material, of the desired quality, at low costs.
Case study: Onion Growers’ Co-operative Purchase and Sale Society Limited
In Maharashtra the major onion growing districts are Nasik, Pune, Ahmednagar, Satara, Dhule
and Jalgaon. In the Ahmednagar district, Parner taluk is a leading onion area for its production.
The onion growing farmers are not able to keep the benefits of production because of the
dominance of middle men, highly fluctuating prices, poor storage facilities, a lack of holding
capacity by farmers and post-harvest losses like sprouting and rotting of the onions. Due to this
problem it was necessary to construct sheds for storing onions for up to a 4-to-6-month period
and then market the onions.
The government of India has also declared the Ahmednagar district as an “Export Zone” area for
onions. Taking this into consideration, in Ahmednagar, the onion growers have established the
Ahmednagar District Onion Growers’ Cooperative Purchase and Sale Society Ltd. The society
has membership with the NAFED, APEDA, NHB, Maharashtra State Agricultural Marketing
Board (MSAMB), Exporters, etc. Presently there are about 1100 members spread over in 300
villages in 14 blocks in Maharashtra. The society office is located at Ahmednagar. The
packaging and grading center is at Supa in Parner taluk of the Ahmednagar district. The main
objectives of the society are to provide technical information for increasing onion production,
storage and market facilities, marketing information and the marketing of onions.
ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY:
Inputs such as seed, fertilizers and organic pesticides will be supplied through the society to its
members. In the case of seed, there is no credit facility available; whereas, for fertilizers the
members pay the amount to the society within 2 to 3 months, for which no interest is charged by
the society. In each block one salesman with an agricultural background was selected by the
society, and he will go and collect onions from the village and send them to the packaging and
grading center. Within 15 days the farmers receive payment in the form of a check or demand
draft (D.D.) from Indian banks. Also, the salesman will get Rs. 2000 salary per month and 0.5
percent from the society’s service charges.
Two types of storage facilities are available at different levels. At the members’ level 25-ton
storage units were provided by Central Bank on a loan basis with 8 percent interest. Preparation
of bank proposals, sanctioning of the loan and assistance in construction of the RCC structure is
done by the society. Presently 450 farmers have a storage facility of 25 to 50 metric tons.
Remaining farmers are following traditional storage only. Packaging is done at Supa. Every day
10 tons of onions are packed through packaging machines in 40 to 60 and 80 to 100 mm grading
in 25-kg, 50-kg and 100-kg bags.
Procured onion is graded and packed at the sub-division level. The society gets the information
from the Saphal markets through National Dairy Development Board (NDDB) channels from
Bangalore, Delhi and Mumbai through telephone calls. Bags, transport charges and 2 percent
service charges to the society have to be paid by the farmers only for local marketing. The
society has received import and export code numbers for exporting onions to foreign countries
from the marketing board. Presently, the society is exporting onions to UAE, other Arab
countries, Singapore and Great Britain (MANAGE 2010).
TRAINING:
1. Crop cultivation practices for onions were given to the farmers by the Rajguru nagar
Onion and Garlic Research Institute.
2. CDs were provided to farmers on cultivation practices.
3. One-day training has been given on sowing, weeding, applying fertilizer, harvesting
onions, etc.
OUTCOMES OF THE SOCIETY:
1. Sharing farmers experiences—problems and solutions
2. Easily accessing innovations and techniques of common interest
3. Accessing credit facilities and enabling the use of such facilities to reach significant
numbers of beneficiaries
4. Distributing improved varieties of seeds and other inputs
5. Sharing information on market trends
PRIVATE EXTENSION THROUGH MASS MEDIA
Private extension through mass media is basically carried out by daily newspapers and journals
in regional languages. In addition, there is large number of private channels operating in almost
all parts of the country. There is a column exclusively for rural development and agriculture
covering topical subjects. For example, a daily newspaper in Andhra Pradesh, publishing the
district editions under the banner of “Eenadu,” provides brief information and guidelines every
day on current problems faced by farmers under the regular column “Ryte raju.” The farmers’
monthly “Annadatha” has a circulation of about 0.2 million touching a large number of villages.
Every month it provides detailed information on seasonal topics pertaining to agriculture,
horticulture, floriculture, sericulture, dairy and livestock, poultry farming, fisheries, shrimp
culture, etc. It has served as a guide to farmers for the past four decades. The crop plans
formulated in the Zonal Research and Advisory Council Meetings of State Agriculture
University for Agro-Climatic Zones are discussed in detail in the journal. “Eenadu” private
television channel daily devotes 30 minutes with the Annadata TV Program and provides
information on agriculture and allied sectors in the morning from 6:30 to 7:30 a.m. in the
regional language. The scientists of State Agricultural Universities (SAUs) in the respective
states are involved in the program twice a week to highlight current topics of importance and use
to farmers.
Most of the national private TV channels also arrange discussions on agricultural issues by
eminent scientists, policy makers, industrialists that deal with agri-inputs and financial
institutions. There are some initiatives in the Information Technology (IT) sector on which
Subject Matter Specialists (SMSs) provide information—on market prices, weather forecast,
inputs such as seed, fertilizer and crop management production technologies.
Example 1: E-Choupal
ITC's E-Choupal initiative (see: http://www.itcportal.com/itc-business/agri-business/e-choupal.aspx
began by deploying technology to re-engineer procurement of soya and other crops from rural
India. It has gone on to serve as a highly profitable distribution and product design channel
supported by India's need to generate foreign exchange, ITC's International Business Division
(ÉÂD) was created in 1990 as an agri-trading company aiming to "offer the world the best of
India's produce." Initially, the agricultural commodity trading business was small compared to
international players. Ây 1996, the opening up of the Indian market had brought in international
competition. Large international companies had better margin-to-risk ratios because of wider
options for risk management and arbitration. For an Indian company to replicate the operating
model of such multinational corporations would have required a massive horizontal and vertical
expansion. In 1998, ITC decided to create a competitive business that did not need a large asset
base.
MANDI SYSTEM
The operation of the mandis (markets) consists of a number of different stages, from the logistics
of transporting grain to marketing to quality inspecting, auctioning, bagging and weighing to
payment. The mandi system does not serve the farmer or the trading companies, such as ITC,
very well. The key problem is the agent's control of the market and the resulting distortions of
price and quality. The ITC developed its E-Choupal strategy as a way to communicate directly
with the farmer and to bypass the inefficiencies arising out of the agents' intermediation, thereby
achieving "virtual vertical integration."
THE E-CHOUPAL SYSTEM
The model is centered on a network of E-Choupals, information centers equipped with a
computer connected to the Internet, located in rural farming villages. E-Choupals serve both as a
social gathering place for the exchange of information (choupal means traditional village
gathering place in Hindi) and an e-commerce hub.
SANCHALAK http://itcportal.com/sustainability/lets-put-india-first/echoupal.aspx
The critical element of the E-Choupal system, and the key to managing the geographical and
cultural breadth of ITC's network, is the sanchalak. There are about 6,5000 E-Choupal and the
local farmer acting as a sanchalak (coordinator), which runs the village E-Choupal, and the
computer usually is located in the sanchalak's home. ITC channels virtually all its
communication through the local sanchalak. Recruiting a local farmer from the community for
this role serves several purposes:
The sanchalak is selected to provide trust in ITC's system.
ITC need not invest in building and securing a physical infrastructure such as a kiosk for
housing the E-Choupal computer.
The sanchalak is trained in computer operation and can act as a familiar and approachable
human interface for the often-illiterate farmers and other villagers.
ITC expects to leverage the profit-making power of the small-scale entrepreneur.
These sanchalaks receive a commission for every transaction processed through the E-Choupal
and also benefit from increased social status, which accompanies the position and is a significant
advantage in rural Indian life. ITC insists that sanchalaks should not give up farming, for this
would compromise the trust that they command. To help ensure that sanchalaks serve their
communities and not just themselves, ITC projects their role as a public office. Hence, they
receive the title of "sanchalak" and take part in a public oath ceremony in which they swear to
serve the farming community through the E-Choupal.
Successful sanchalaks usually have a number of common characteristics, including risk-taking
ability, the willingness to try something new, ambition and the desire to earn additional income
through the E-Choupal. Sanchalaks are usually of median wealth and status in their communities,
able to read and write and are part of an extended family large enough that they can find time to
service the E-Choupal. Sanchalaks undergo training at the nearest ITC plant. For the sale of
products through E-Choupals, the sanchalaks receive product training directly from the
manufacturer with ITC involving itself only in product design and facilitation. Nonetheless, their
role requires considerable entrepreneurial initiative and entails some operational costs, between
US$60 and US$160 per year for electricity and phone line charges. ITC employs a variety of
motivation techniques to encourage sales. One technique is to hold a ceremony where sanchalaks
are presented with their annual commission checks and public announcements of earnings are
made.
SAMYOJAK
ITC also incorporates a local commission agent, known as the samyojak (collaborator).
Samyojaks earn income from ITC by providing logistical services that substitute for the lack of
rural infrastructure and by providing information and market signals on trading transactions to
the E-Choupal system. In effect, ITC uses agents as providers of essential services, not as
administrators in a trading transaction. They play an especially important role in the initial stages
of setting up the E-Choupals because they know which farmers grow soya, what kind of families
they have, what their financial situation is and who is seen as "acceptable" in the villages and
therefore might make a good sanchalak.
ITC is strongly committed to involving samyojaks in the on-going operation of the E-Choupal
system, allowing them revenue streams through providing services such as management of cash,
bagging and labor in remote ITC procurement hubs, handling of mandi paperwork for ITC
procurement and as licensed administrators for the retail transactions of the E-Choupal. ITC
continues to pay mandi tax. It offers significant commissions for samyojak services. Finally, the
agents are fragmented and fear that if they do not agree to work with ITC, another agent will
gain the promised E-Choupal revenues. This facilitates cooperation of samyojaks.
E-CHOUPAL NEW SUPPLY CHAIN
The re-engineered supply chain looks very different from the existing system and has the
following stages:
Pricing–The previous day's mandi closing price is used to determine the benchmark Fair
Average Quality (FAQ) price at the E-Choupal. The benchmark price is static for a given day.
This information and the previous day mandi prices are communicated to the sanchalak through
the E-Choupal portal. The commission agents at the mandi are responsible for entering daily
mandi prices into the E-Choupal. If and when the Internet connection fails, the sanchalak calls an
ITC field representative.
Inspection and Grading–To initiate a sale, the farmer brings a sample of his produce to the E-
Choupal. The sanchalak inspects the produce. Based on his assessment of the quality, he makes
appropriate deductions (if any) to the benchmark price and gives the farmer a conditional quote.
The sanchalak performs the quality tests in the farmer's presence and must justify any deductions
to the farmer. The benchmark price represents the upper limit on the price a sanchalak can quote.
These simple checks and balances ensure transparency in a process where quality testing and
pricing happen at multiple levels. If the farmer chooses to sell his soya to ITC, the sanchalak
gives him a note capturing his name, his village, particulars about the quality tests (foreign
matter and moisture content), approximate quantity and conditional price.
Weighing and Payment–The farmer takes the note from the sanchalak and proceeds with his
crop to the nearest ITC procurement hub (lTC's point for collection of produce and distribution
of inputs sold into rural areas). Some procurement hubs are simply lTC's factories that also act as
collection points. Others are purely warehousing operations. ITC's goal is to have a processing
center within a 30-to-40-kilometer radius of each farmer.
At the ITC procurement hub, a sample of the farmer's produce is taken and set aside for
laboratory tests. A chemist visually inspects the soybean and verifies the assessment of the
sanchalak. It is important to note that this is the only test assessment before the sale. Laboratory
testing of the sample for oil content is performed after the sale and does not alter the price. The
reason for this is that farmers, having historically been exploited, are not immediately willing to
trust a laboratory test. Therefore pricing is based solely upon tests that can by understood by the
farmer. The farmer accepts foreign matter deductions for the presence of stones or hay, based
upon the visual comparison of his produce with his neighbors. He will accept moisture content
deductions based upon the comparative softness of his produce when he bites it.
ITC is working to change farmer attitudes towards laboratory testing. It is developing an
appreciation of better quality by using the subsequent lab tests to reward farmers with bonus
points if their quality exceeds the norm. At the end of the year, farmers can redeem their
accumulated bonus points through the E-Choupal for farm inputs or contributions toward
insurance premiums. After the inspection, the farmer's cart is weighed on an electronic
weighbridge—first with the produce and then without. The difference is used to determine the
weight of his produce.
Hub Logistics–After the inspection and weighing are complete, the farmer then collects his
payment in full at the payment counter. The farmer is also reimbursed for transporting his crop to
the procurement hub. Every stage of the process is accompanied by appropriate documentation.
The farmer is given a copy of lab reports, agreed rates and receipts for his records. Samyojaks,
who are adept at handling large amounts of cash, are entrusted with the responsibility of
payment, except at procurement centers near large ITC operations where ITC handles cash
disbursement. Samyojaks also handle much of the procurement hub logistics, including labor
management at the hub, bagging (if necessary), storage management, transportation from the hub
to processing factories and handling mandi paperwork for the crops procured at the hub. For his
services in the procurement process, the samyojak is paid a 0.5 percent commission.
TRAINING FOR E-CHOUPAL AGENTS
Training the sanchalaks to use a computer effectively is vital to the success of E-Choupal.
Immediately after sanchalaks are recruited, they are invited to the nearest ITC plant for a day-
long training program. The majority of this training is centered on getting the sanchalaks
comfortable with the equipment. At the time of installation, a coordinator usually accompanies
the vendor who installs the system. The sanchalak is given some of the same basic training by
the vendor. ITC then allows the sanchalak to experiment with the computer for about a week.
During this time, typically the younger members of his family also get to use the computer.
After the first week, the sanchalaks are invited to the hub or the plant for the second phase of
training, wherein customized training is then provided to raise each user's comfort and
competency level. During this phase, sanchalaks are trained to use the E-Choupal website and to
access information from the site. Sanchalaks may also bring their children or other members of
the family who are interested in learning about the computer. After a month, trainees are brought
in for a third and final phase of initial training. By this time, sanchalaks are usually fairly
familiar with operating the computer and accessing information. The goal of this session is to
learn to troubleshoot common problems. Sanchalaks are taught about the importance of other
devices such as the Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) and the battery backup. They are given
guidelines on what to look for when there is a problem. ITC considers training to be a continuous
process and one that requires a concerted effort from all field operatives, even though this may
not be their primary job.
EXTENSION SERVICES THROUGH E-CHOUPAL
A major impact of the E-Choupal system comes from bridging the information and service gap
of rural India. The E-Choupal system leverages technology that can reach a wide audience
literally at the click of a mouse. The constant presence of sanchalaks, who themselves are
farmers who apply these techniques, ensures that the practices actually make their way from the
website to the field. Some areas on which information and services are provided by the E-
Choupal website and e-commerce system include:
Weather – This is a very popular section on the website because it provides localized weather
information at the district level. E-Choupal's weather information is intelligently coupled with
advice on the activities in the agricultural lifecycle.
Agricultural Best Practices – Scientific practices organized by crop type are available on the
website. Additional questions are answered through Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) and
access to experts who respond to emails from the villages.
Customized Quality Solutions – After the sale of a crop is completed, ITC performs laboratory
testing of the sample collected. Based on these results, farmers are given customized feedback on
how they can improve crop quality and yield.
Soil Testing – ITC links the input sale to information on the website and services such as soil
testing.
CONSTRAINTS OF E-CHOUPAL
The E-Choupal model has tried to overcome several constraints inherent in the village setting.
Power–Power availability in rural India is unreliable, and the quality of power is sub-
standard. ITC has overcome this problem by providing a battery-based Uninterrupted
Power Supply (UPS) backup and by using solar battery chargers. In order to control
voltage spikes, UPS units are designed to remain effective between 90V and 300V.
Transportation–Initial E-Choupals were placed in villages that are within a 10-to-15-
kilometer radius of a city so as to avoid transportation constraints.
Customer Base–Before the arrival of E-Choupals, most villagers had never seen a computer.
ITC organized meetings and focus groups of farmers to gather information about
potential user groups. The feedback that was collected from these focus groups was used
in the design of the functionality and user interface of the application. ITC has worked
hard to create interfaces in the farmers' native language, Hindi.
Connectivity–The existing telecom infrastructure was not capable of supporting data traffic.
With the help of C-DoT, ITC made modifications to the RNS kit which helped them
achieve 40 Kbps throughput. As the E-Choupal model has progressed, ITC has decided to
adopt a satellite-based technology (VSAT) which enables a throughput rate of up to 256
Kbps. This is, however, an expensive solution, costing about Rs. 120,000 per installation.
Despite higher setup costs incurred by the VSAT installation, these E-Choupals recover
investment faster than non-VSAT E-Choupals.
INFORMATION COLLECTION THROUGH E-CHOUPAL
The E-Choupal system is designed to gather customer information over time. Such information
includes their location, creditworthiness, consumer preferences, financial position and spending
patterns. It represents the first link between this vast untapped market and urban commerce. The
information gathering is currently semi-automated. Information on each sanchalak is gathered
during user registration. The sanchalak also keeps a record of farmer visits, inquiries, purchases,
etc. The Question-and-Answer (Q&A) section of the website allows for two-way transport of
data that is then stored in a database. The website does not currently process live transactions.
The web database tracks the Internet usage patterns at E-Choupals. From this database, ITC has
gathered information such as peak usage periods, preferred Internet destinations, information
most sought after and information least sought after. ITC intends to leverage the information
gathered to help better understand the behavior of their customers, identify unfulfilled needs and
develop ways to serve them efficiently.
E-CHOUPALS IMPACT
The collective impact of better information and new services has been to increase the area sown
under the soya crop and to increase productivity. Both farmers and ITC have benefited. The new
system benefits both the farmers as well as ITC mainly by reducing inefficiencies. E-Choupal
allows farmers daily access to prices at several nearby mandis. Moreover, through E-Choupal,
farmers make the critical decision of when and where to sell their crops. Both factors work
together to provide the farmers with a better price for their crops. Farmers can make use of the
information available to them through E-Choupal to improve yields. Moreover, the seed,
fertilizer and consumer products offered to them through E-Choupal cost substantially less than
through other local sources, such as village traders. Thus, there are meaningful net economic
benefits to farmers, and it is having a measurable impact on what farmers choose to do
(Aggarwal A.K., 2008).
India is the seventh largest country in terms of area (3,287,263 sq. km. of which land is
2,973,193 sq. km. and water is 314,070 sq. km.), and it is the second most populous country in
the world. Arable land of India is 48.83 percent of which 60.2 million hectare is irrigated (2005-
2006)1. The climate within India varies greatly—from desert in the west and rainforests in the
southwest to glaciers in the north. The country experiences four seasons: winter (January and
February), summer (March to May), a monsoon season (June to September), and a post-monsoon
season (October to December)2. The Planning Commission (1989) has demarcated the
geographical area of India into 15 agro-climatic regions. These are further divided into more
homogeneous 72 sub-zones.
Given its vast area and diverse agro-climatic regions, different crops, commodities, animals and
fish species are produced across the country. With the primary objective of boosting agricultural
exports from India, in March 2001, Government of India announced a policy of setting up of
Agri Export Zones (AEZs) across the country. The Central Government has sanctioned 60 AEZs
comprising about 40 agricultural commodities .AEZs is spread over 230 districts in 20 states in
the country3. Total investments in AEZs across 20 states so far have been worth . 109.8 million
with exports valued at . 1069 million 4. There are five statutory commodity boards under the
Department of Commerce.
These boards are responsible for production, development and export of tea, coffee, rubber,
spices and tobacco.5 In order to promote other commodities, a number of commodity
development boards were established at national and state levels. Being a large and pronominally
agriculture based country, pluralistic agricultural extension system is existing here i.e. public
sector including commodity boards, private sector, NGO and farmer controlled extension
systems are prevalent (UNDP, 1991). “Commodity–based extension run by government,
parastatals, or private firms is the most frequent extension organization” (FAO, 1997). The
nobility of the system is, it is vertically integrated. This system creates employment
opportunities for the millions of people in rural areas for their livelihood.
The input supply, marketing, credit and extension services are provided as coordinated package.
It functions in PPP mode (Ray, 1991). As Rivera (2003) has mentioned that “extension is a
support and educational agency focusing on changing human behaviour in positive sense, and as
such is a very important actor in any national strategy of food security. However, no matter how
efficient is an extension system, how qualified and competent its human resources, how generous
financing it enjoys and how sound is its operational strategy, extension alone cannot guarantee
sustainable food security”. Therefore, for the betterment of the system, in most cases, the
organizational structure, research, extension and marketing systems are in the process of
changing of these commodity boards. Commodity boards based extension systems are perfect
examples of pluralistic extension system as Heemskerk and Davis5 mentioned in the thematic
note that “Pluralistic extension recognises the inherent diversity of farmers and farming systems
and the need to address challenges in rural development with different services and approaches”.
Thirteen centrally governed commodity boards are listed in this chapter.
Central Silk Board (CSB)
The CSB was established in 1949 as a statutory body under the government of India. It is a
national organization dedicated to the overall development of sericulture and the silk industry.6
The CSB provides necessary support for research, development, extension and training through
its country-wide network of units. In addition, the CSB organizes production and supply of
quality silkworm seed, mulberry cuttings, etc.7 Its headquarters are located in
Bangalore. www.antya.com/detail/Central-Silk-Board/21539&tab=images
Silk is a part of the life and culture of Indians. Although India produces all varieties of silk (dress
materials, scarves/stoles, readymade garments, etc.), the silk saris are unique. It has been the
traditional costume of Indian women. There are numerous references in Indian literature about
this draped garment and the style of wearing differs over time, regions and people. The silk saris
of India are among the living examples of the excellent craftsmanship of the weavers of the
country.
The artistic and aesthetic sense of Indian weavers does not lie in the striking colors that they
choose for the fabric, but in their mastery in creating floral designs, beautiful textures, fine
geometry and product durability. In India, there are a number of silk weaving centers, known for
their distinct patterns, styles and products. There is great pattern variety and diversity. Silk is
always interwoven into the way of life for a region, particularly for women.8
MANDATE9
Promote development of the silk industry by all appropriate measures
Undertake, assist and encourage scientific, technological and economic research in the
silk sector
Devise means to improve cultivation of mulberry plantation
Produce and distribute healthy silkworm seeds, and ensure qualitative improvement
through the Central Silkworm Seed Regulation/Amendment to the CSB Act.
Improve quality and production of raw silk and marketing of silk
Advise and report to the government of India on all matters relating to development of
the silk industry, including import and export of raw silk
MISSION
Make continuous efforts in Research and Development (R&D) and Transfer of
Technology
Create greater opportunities for gainful employment and improve levels of income from
sericulture through the spread of scientific sericulture practices
Improve productivity in all stages of silk production
Strengthen levels of efficiency through a commitment to quality
CLIENTS
Departments concerned with sericulture development in all states of the country
Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)
Farmers practicing sericulture
Silk reelers
Silk spinners
Private silkworm seed producers
Exporters
Entrepreneurs
Cocoon growers
Manufacturers of chemicals and bio-pesticides for controlling pests and diseases of
silkworms and its food plants.
SERVICES OFFERED 10
Services offered to states’ Sericulture Departments and NGOs:
Basic planting material of high-yielding varieties of silkworm food plants
Region and season-specific packages of practices for food plant cultivation and silkworm
rearing
Collaboration in pest and disease surveillance and control
Technology packages for reeling and spinning
Post-cocoon research support
Assistance in supply of inputs to rearers and reelers
Implementation of the centrally sponsored Catalytic Development Program in
collaboration with all state sericulture departments to provide services to the general
public:11
Sericulturists
Silkworm seed producers
Silk reelers/spinners
Exporters
Entrepreneurs
Silk goods manufacturers and consumers
SERICULTURE 12
Sericulture involves rearing of silkworms for the production of raw silk, which is the yarn
obtained out of cocoons spun by certain species of insects. The major activities of sericulture
include food-plant cultivation to feed the silkworms, which spin silk cocoons, and reeling of the
cocoons for unwinding the silk filament for value-added benefits such as processing and
weaving.
Why sericulture? It provides high employment potential, vibrancy to village economics, low
gestation and high returns, a female-friendly occupation, an ideal program for weaker sections of
society, eco-friendly activity and high employment potential.
Currently, 60 lakh persons are engaged in various sericulture activities in the country. It is
estimated that sericulture can generate employment at 11 worker days per kg of raw silk
production (in on-farm and off-farm activities) throughout the year. No other industry generates
this kind of employment, especially in rural areas; hence, sericulture is used as a tool for rural
reconstruction. It is reported in (Annual Report-2009-10) that 2009-10 was remarkable year for
silk industry. The industry has sown a positive growth to the tune of 7.2 per cent in overall silk
production and 8.03 per cent employment.
Research and Development 13
Sericulture involves growing of host plants, rearing of silkworms, reeling, twisting, weaving and
marketing of various value-added products and services. In order to meet these requirements,
new varieties of mulberry silkworm (to suit various agro-climatic conditions and to increase
productivity, quality and profitability of sericulture) methodologies, packages of practices, etc.
have to be developed and released.
Main research institutes and nested units:
Three Central Sericultural Research and Training Institutes (CSR&TIs) at Mysore
(Karnataka), Berhampore (West Bengal ) and Pampore (Jammu and Kashmir)
Central Tasar Research and Training Institute, Ranchi (Jharkhand)
Central Sericultural Germplasm Resources Center, Hosur (Tamil Nadu)
Silkworm Seed Technology Laboratory, Bangalore (Karnataka)
Seri-biotech Research Laboratory, Bangalore (Karnataka)
Central Muga Eri Research and Training Institute, Lahdoigarh ( Assam )
10 Regional Research Stations for Mulberry, 8 for Tasar, 1 for Muga and
Two for Eri at various locations in the country.
44 Research Extension Centers for Mulberry, 13 for Tasar, 3 for Muga and 2 for Eri, 1
Satellite Silkworm Breeding Station at Coonoor (TN) and 18 Sub-RECs for Mulberry and
1 Sub- REC for Muga
PROJECT FOR STRENGTHENING EXTENSION SYSTEM FOR BIVOLTINE SERICULTURE
(PEBS)14
PEBS is a technical cooperation project with the Japan International Cooperation Agency
(JICA).
Background of the Project
India produces 14,600 MT of mulberry silk (2002-2003), out of which, 95 percent is of the
multi-voltine variety, which is qualitatively inferior. The government of India is promoting
several programs in order to increase the production of bivoltine silk, which is superior in
quality. At the request of the government of India, the government of Japan (through JICA) has
cooperated with CSB in implementing the following sericulture projects since 1991.
Bivoltine Sericulture Technology Development Project (BSTDP)
Project for Promotion of Popularizing the Practical Bivoltine Sericulture Technology
(PPPBST)
Project for Strengthening Extension System for Bivoltine Sericulture (PEBS)
From 1991 to 1997, the government of India, with JICA’s assistance, implemented BSTDP,
which resulted in the development of bivoltine sericulture technology through research institutes
of the CSB.
The second phase of the project, PPPBST, was implemented for a period of five years starting in
1997. During this project, the technologies developed under BSTDP were verified with the
farmers’ field conditions and demonstrated to farmers and reelers. The trials revealed that an
average cocoon yield of 70 kg per 100 dfls is possible under farmers’ conditions. Furthermore,
the quality of silk improved to international 2A – 4A grade with a renditta of 5.5 to 7.
The overwhelming response received for the PPPBST project resulted in implementing the third
phase of the project, PEBS, in the states of Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu. The
five-year project began in August 2002.
PURPOSE AND ACTIVITIES OF PEBS
The purpose of PEBS is to establish a model of comprehensive sericulture extension system that
will materialize by strengthening/improving of extension systems for sericulture technologies,
training system for sericulture farmers/government staff, silkworm seed production system so on.
To achieve the purpose, the project has been implementing the following five major activities:
Formulation of an action plan for bivoltine sericulture
Establishment of a coordination/collaboration mechanism among CSB and Departments
of Sericulture (DOSs) for extension of bivoltine sericulture
Establishment of a system for mass production of quality seed
Strengthening of training and improvement of training facilities for bivoltine sericulture
Establishment of a model for bivoltine sericulture extension which is sustainable and
replicable in Indian conditions
ROLE OF EACH GOVERNMENT
The Japanese government dispatches experts from Japan (both long term and short term) in
different fields to India, accepts Indian counterparts for training in Japan and supplies necessary
equipment required for the project. The Indian government extends laboratory facilities,
allocates counterparts required for implementation of the project and organizes training programs
for the field staff, farmers and reelers including on-the-spot guidance. The Departments of
Sericulture (DOSs), the state governments identify the farmers as envisaged in the project,
provide necessary extension services through Technical Service Centers, chalky rearing and
training to the farmers.
COCONUT DEVELOPMENT BOARD (CDB)
The CDB, established on January 12, 1981, is a statutory body established under the Ministry of
Agriculture, government of India for the integrated development of coconut cultivation and the
coconut industry in the country with a focus on increasing productivity and product
diversification. www.coconutboard.nic.in 15
MANDATE
The CDB’s headquarters are at Kochi in Kerala and its regional offices are at Bangalore in
Karnataka, Chennai in Tamil Nadu and Guwahati in Assam. There are six state centers situated
at Bhubaneswar in Orissa, Calcutta in West Bengal, Patna in Bihar, Thane in Maharashtra,
Hyderabad in Andhra Pradesh and Port Blair in the Union Territory of the Andaman and Nicobar
Islands. The board has established nine Demonstration Seed Production (DSP) farms in different
locations of the country, and now, seven farms are maintained. A Market Development
Information Center has been established in Delhi. The CDB has set up a Technology
Development Center at Vazhakulam near Aluva in Kerala.
FUNCTIONS OF THE BOARD
Adopting measures for the development of the coconut industry, inter alia.
Imparting technical advice to those engaged in coconut cultivation and industry.
Providing financial and other assistance for expansion of the coconut areas.
Encouraging adoption of modern technologies for the processing of coconut and its products.
Adopting measures to get incentive prices for coconut and its products.
Recommending measures for improving the marketing of coconut and its products
Recommending measures for regulating imports and exports of coconut and its products.
Fixing grades, specifications and standards for coconut and its products.
Financing suitable programs to increase the production of coconut and to improve the quality
and yield of coconut.
Assisting, encouraging, promoting and financing agricultural, technological, industrial or
economic research on coconut and its products.
Collecting statistics on coconut and its products, and publishing them.
Undertaking publicity activities and publishing books and periodicals on coconut and its
products.
THRUST AREAS OF THE B OARD
Increasing the production of quality planting material.
Creating future production potential by increasing coconut areas.
Improving productivity of existing coconut holdings.
Managing major pests and diseases.
Strengthening the coconut industry by promoting product diversification and by-product
utilization.
TECHNOLOGY:
The CDB is the pioneer organization for coconut technology development in India. They are:
Undertaking project feasibility studies and preparing detailed project feasibility reports.
Providing technical know-how for coconut based products such as coconut cream,
coconut milk, spray-dried coconut milk powder, packing and preservation of tender
coconut water, shell charcoal, coconut water-based vinegar, aqueous processed coconut
oil and virgin coconut oil.
Giving technical guidance to entrepreneurs in setting up coconut based units.
In addition to this the Central Plantation Crops Research Institute (CPCRI) has been set up as the
pioneering institute in India for conducting research on plantation crops. It was established in
1916, but subsequently was brought under the mandate of Indian Council of Agricultural
Research (ICAR) during 1970. Its initial mandate was on crop husbandry of coconut, areca nut,
cocoa, oil palm, cashew and spices. However, the restructuring process resulted in the
establishment of separate research institutes/centers for spices, cashews and oil palm, but the
CPCRI continued to maintain strong linkages with these institutes. The main aim of the institute
is to develop appropriate production, protection and processing technologies for coconut, areca
nut and cocoa through basic and applied research. Its other objectives are to:
Act as a national repository for the genetic resources of plantation crops.
Produce parental lines and breeders’ stock.
Develop improved palm based cropping/farming systems through more effective use of
natural resources to increase productivity and income.
Collect, collate and disseminate information on the mandated crops to all concerned.
Coordinate research on the mandated crops within the country and execute the research
programs under the All India Coordinated Research Project on Palms.
Transfer technologies developed at CPCRI to the farmers through the cooperation of
developmental departments16. CDB will be involved in coconut based faring system
using intercropping of vegetables, flowers, spices, aromatic plants etc. (GOI, 2010)
COFFEE BOARD
The Coffee Board of India (1942)17 is an autonomous body, functioning under the Ministry of
Commerce and Industry, government of India. Set up under an Act of the Parliament of India in
1942, the board focuses on research, development, extension, quality, market information, and
the domestic and external promotion of Indian coffees.
www.thomex.com/Industrylink/exportpromotion.html#26
Until 1995, the Coffee Board had a pool (controlled) marketing system of coffee in India.
However, since 1995, marketing of coffee is strictly a private sector activity. In fact the Coffee
Board went through a massive downsizing and two-thirds of its employees were retired under a
voluntary retirement scheme. It was reported in (Annual report 2009-10) that during 2009-10,
export permits were issued for 2,04,174 MT of coffee valued at US $ 443 million surpassing the
target of 2,00,00 MT.
The Coffee Board conducts basic and applied research on coffee and can boast of 75 years in
coffee research. The Central Coffee Research Institute in the Chikmagalur District of Karnataka
State has been in the forefront of coffee research over the years and continues to be one of the
premier institutes in the world as far as coffee research is concerned.
The board also has a vast extension network spread over the three main producing states of
Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, as well as in the non-traditional areas of Andhra Pradesh,
Orissa and the seven north-eastern states. The extension network provides the day-to-day link
with the grower community, and this wing facilitates the transfer of technology from lab to land.
The board also encourages the consumption of coffee in India and abroad. Towards this end, the
board participates in coffee-centric/food and beverage exhibitions in India and abroad. The board
also runs 11 India Coffee Houses/Depots in the country. The India Coffee brand of coffee
powder is well known in India for its quality and aroma. For many years, the board has worked
on the quality of coffees of India. The board runs two quality control laboratories in Bangalore
and Chikmagalur and one quality testing center in Chettalli, which control and advise the
industry on quality issues. The labs are equipped with the best roasting and brewing machines.
Cup-tasters and quality evaluators keep a strict vigil on the pre- and post-harvest processes to
ensure that the quality of Indian coffee is maintained.
EXTENSION SERVICES OF THE COFFEE BOARD
The principal activity of the Coffee Board’s extension service is transferring of coffee
technologies standardized by the research department to the coffee growers for achieving better
production/productivity by improving the quality of coffee. It is helping to bridge the gap
between coffee planters and research scientists in the implementation of coffee technology to the
coffee estates.
Around 320000 hectares cultivated by over 147000 growers are covered by the extension service
in the traditional tracts of Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu. The Joint Director of extension at
Hassan is monitoring and guiding the extension activities of the three Dy. Directors of Extension
(DDEs), seven Senior Liaison Officers (SLOs) and 17 Junior Liaison Officers (JLOs) in
Karnataka. The Joint Director of Extension (JDE) at Kalpetta is monitoring and guiding the
extension activities of two DDEs and eight SLOs and 11 JLOs in Kerala and Tamil Nadu States.
The Secretary of the Coffee Board at HO is the overall supervisor for implementation of
extension plan programs and extension services. The planning and coordination of various
activities and monitoring them is done by the Planning and Coordination Cell at HO, Bangalore.
The main extension programs that have been envisioned are:
Execution of various on-going extension programs as per the planned calendar of events.
Constitution of Farmers Participatory Method groups and conducting farmer-extension
workshops/meetings in all the potential areas.
Conducting awareness campaigns and workshops on the management of coffee berry
borer and white stem borer and distributing broca traps, picking mats, etc., at subsidized
rates.
Conducting mass contact programs in Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu.
Implementing a pilot program on eco-friendly control measures for the management of
WSB.
Focusing on constituting new Self-Help Groups (SHGs), continuing specified activities,
assessing the performance of SHGs and conducting district level workshops and
conventions.
Raising and distributing coffee seedlings/planting materials through mini SHGs apart
from the board’s units like CCRI, CRSS and CDFs/TECs.
Getting widespread publicity on the Price Stabilization Fund program and apprising the
growers of the program through various forums like in-house discussions, FPM meetings,
etc.
Conducting Regional Advisory Committee meetings in all the regions of traditional
coffee growing areas.
Conducting a survey on crop prospects and crop estimations, outbreak of pests and
diseases, etc.
Collecting and furnishing monthly rainfall data during the drought period, and rendering
suitable advice to the planting community.
Maintaining TECs and adopting the Annual Action Plan to improve farm productivity.
Supplying elite plant materials to the coffee growers.
FARMERS PARTICIPATORY METHOD PROGRAM
The objective is to encourage a group approach among small coffee growers. The board is
establishing such groups, each consisting of minimum 20 members. These groups are scheduled
to meet on a monthly or bimonthly basis to deliberate on the technologies suitable for
implementation so as to be able to improve their technical knowledge on all aspects of coffee
cultivation and their decision making on and adoption of available technology. These groups are
addressed by extension officers and coffee scientists on current technology and the importance of
adopting timely cultural operations to improve productivity among small growers. The members
are also provided the opportunity to share their individual knowledge.
GROUP GATHERINGS/SEMINARS/CONTACTS PROGRAM
Extension officers conduct village-level farm gatherings and awareness seminars on various
aspects of coffee for the benefit of both large and small coffee growers periodically at different
zones of coffee areas.
MASS CONTACT PROGRAM
Mass contact programs are generally held every year at different zones. Extension and research
officers visit coffee holdings in the targeted villages and extend comprehensive technical know-
how on improving production, combating pests and diseases and improving skills. The soil/leaf
samples are also analysed to recommend a manure and lime schedule for each of the estates
visited.
SELF-HELP GROUPS (SHGS)
Under this program the board is providing a one-time grant limited to a maximum of Rs.2 lakhs
to SHGs who are able to come together and find a solution to common problems through a
participatory group approach. The groups are encouraged to organize themselves as a registered
association under the cooperative society act and collectively invest in creating suitable
infrastructure to promote productivity, quality, disease and pest management through the
community approach and to adapt measures for integrated nutrition management and other
measures aimed at sustainable coffee production. Financial assistance is provided on the basis of
a detailed project report, and there is a mechanism for periodic monitoring the status of the
SHGs. Some of the activities that are encouraged through SHGs are:
Development of a community nursery for the production of planting material.
Procurement and use of farm equipment/estate equipment/machinery on a community
basis.
Adoption of effective measures for the control of pests and diseases.
Promotion of the use of technologies for sustainable coffee production.
Promotion of specialty coffee production.
Creation of infrastructure like store houses, pulper houses and water reservoirs.
COIR B OARD
The Coir Board, established 1953 18, is a statutory body established by the government of India
under legislation enacted by Parliament, namely in the Coir Industry Act of 1953, for the
promotion and development of the coir industry. Section 4 of the Coir Industry Act of 1953
empowers the central government to constitute the Coir Board.
www.thomex.com/Industrylink/exportpromotion.html#26
HISTORY
Rope and cordage, made out of coconut fiber, have been in use from ancient times. Indian
navigators, who sailed the seas to Malaya, Java, China and to the Gulf of Arabia centuries ago,
used coir for their ship’s cables. Arab writers from the 11th century A.D. referred to the extensive
use of coir for ship’s cables, fenders and rigging. During 1840, Captain Widely, in cooperation
with Captain Logan and Mr. Thomas Treloar, founded the well-known carpet firms of Treloar
and Sons in Ludgate Hill, England for the manufacture of coir into various fabrics suitable for
floor coverings.
The coir manufacturing industry—producing coir mats, matting and other floor coverings—was
started in India over 100 years ago when the first factory was set up in Alleppey in 1859 by the
late Mr. James Darragh, an adventurous Irish-born American national. Enterprising Indians
followed the trail that was blazed Mr. Darragh.
PROGRAMS IN OPERATION22
Rubber Plantation Development Scheme Phase IV
Rubber Plantation Development Scheme Phase V
Rubber Plantation Development Scheme Phase VI
Rubber Plantation Development Scheme in the Northeast
Schemes for Assisting Planting and Upkeep
Scheme for Popularizing use of Low Volume Sprayers
Scheme for Improving Tapping
Schemes for Assisting Rubber Growers’ Cooperatives
Scheme for Promoting Rubber Producers Societies (RPSs)
Schemes for Assisting Companies in the RPS Sector
Schemes for Assisting Large Growers
SPICES B OARD
The Spices Board is the flagship organization for the development and worldwide promotion of
Indian spices. The board is an international link between the Indian exporters and the importers
abroad. The board spearheads activities for excellence of Indian spices, involving every segment
of the industry. The board has made quality and hygiene the cornerstones for its development
and promotional strategies.23 The Spices Board was constituted on February 26, 1986 and
functions under the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, government of India. The board is
responsible for the export promotion of the scheduled spices. It also looks after the production
and development of cardamom and vanilla. It is engaged in providing quality certification,
quality control and registration of exporters and the collection and documentation of trade
information.24 The Spices Board carries out many, multifaceted activities, including:25
o Promotion of exports of spices and spice products.
o Maintenance and monitoring of the quality of exports.
o Development and implementation of better production methods through scientific,
technological and economic research.
o Training and guidance for farmers on getting higher and better quality yields through
scientific agricultural practices.
o Providing financial and material support to growers.
o Encouraging organic production and export of spices.
o Facilitating infrastructure for processing and value addition.
o Registering and licensing of all spice exporters.
o Assisting the study and research of better processing practices, fool proof quality
management systems, improved grading methods and effective packaging techniques.
o Producing promotional and educative materials in a variety of media for the benefit of
exporters and importers
PRIMARY EXTENSION AND TRANSFER OF TECHNOLOGY ACTIVITIES26
o Advisory services are provided to spice farmers on Integrated Nutrient, Pest and Disease
Management.
o The Spice Board organizes training programs on spice production technology, organic
farming, and bio-agent production to farmers and extension personnel.
o Technology dissemination is also handled through the All India Radio/Doordarsan.
Mobile Agri Clinics: These clinics are implemented to create an awareness of the need to
achieve sustainable production through the adoption of a scientific package of practices with the
least adverse impact on the environment. This is implemented through regular scientific
interventions at the farm-level in various locations of the cardamom tract. These interventions
also bring about a close interaction between scientists and farmers.
Good Agriculture Practices (GAP) Training Programs: These are residential, three-month
training programs on GAP for quality spice production, especially for the unemployed youth in
India. This training program was designed for rural youth who are interested in taking up
agriculture as a profession. The program focuses on ecologically sound and sustainable spice
production. This program may also provide employment opportunities in nursery production,
bio-agent production, consultancy services, etc. Further entrepreneurs/Non-Governmental
Organizations (NGOs) could utilize the expertise of the trainees for improving farms.
DEVELOPMENTAL PROGRAMS27
o Rain Water Harvesting Devices in Cardamom
o Improved Cardamom Curing Devices for Small Cardamom
o Allotment of Cardamom Certified Bed Nursery/Polybag Nursery/Sucker Nursery for the
Year
o Cardamom Replanting Scheme
o Drying Yard Construction for Pepper/Chili/Ginger/Turmeric/Seed Spices/Tree Spices
o Supply of polythene sheets for Pepper/ Chili/Turmeric/Seed Spices/Tree Spices
o Supply of Bamboo Mats to Pepper Growers
o Supply of Pepper Thresher
o Promoting Production of Organic Spices
o Setting Up of Vermicompost Unit
o Setting up bio-agent production units
o Farm Ponds/Wells/Bore Wells under WGDP Kerala/Tamil Nadu
o Promoting Integrated Pest Management (IPM) in Chili
o Irrigation Pump Set/Sprinkler Irrigation Equipment/Drip Irrigation Equipment in
Cardamom Plantations under WGDP
o Large Cardamom New Planting
o Supply of Moisture Meters for Spices for Post-Harvest Improvement
o Organic Cultivation of Ginger in Northeast States
o Organic Cultivation of Lakadong Turmeric in Northeast States
o Production of Organic Pepper in Northeast States
o Supply of Seed Spices Threshers for Post-Harvest Improvement of Seed Spices
o Soil Conservation Subsidy under WGDP
o Stainless Steel Distillation Unit for Mint
o Organic Certification Assistance Farms/Processing Units, Working Procedure and
Application Form
o Supply of Turmeric Polishers
T EA B OARD
The Tea Board was constituted on April 1, 1954 and functions as a statutory body of the central
government under the Ministry of Commerce. The board has wide functions and responsibilities
like rendering financial and technical assistance for cultivation, manufacturing and marketing of
tea; export promotion; aiding Research and Development (R&D) activities to improve tea
production and quality; collection and maintenance of statistical data and publication.28
http://www.teaboard.gov.in
The genesis of the Tea Board dates back to 1903 when the Indian Tea Cess Bill was passed. The
bill provided for levying a cess on tea exports—the proceeds of which were to be used for the
promotion of Indian tea both within and outside India. The present Tea Board succeeded the
Central Tea Board and the Indian Tea Licensing Committee. The activities of the two previous
bodies had been confined largely to regulation of tea cultivation and the export of tea as required
by the International Tea Agreement then in force, and the promotion of tea consumption.29
ORGANIZATION AND FUNCTIONS
The present Tea Board is constituted of 31 members (including chairman) drawn from members
of Parliament, tea producers, tea traders, tea brokers, consumers, representatives of governments
from the principal tea producing states and trade unions . The board is reconstituted every three
years. The following are the standing committees of the board: 1 Executive Committee, 2 Export
Promotion Committee, 3 Labor Welfare Committee, and 4 Development Committee.
FUNDS
Funds for the aforesaid functions are made available to the board by the government through
plan and non-plan budgetary allocations. Tea cess is levied on all teas produced in India under
Section 25(1) of the Tea Act, 1953. The act provides for levying cess up to 50 paise per kilogram
of tea produced in India. Currently, however, the cess is collected at the rate of 30 paise per kg.
except Darjeeling teas, for which only 12 paise is levied. The cess at present is collected by the
Central Excise Department and credited to the Consolidated Fund of India after deducting the
expenses of collection. Funds are released by the central government in favour of the Tea
Board from time to time on the basis of the sanctioned budget after due appropriation by the
Parliament. Such funds received by the board are being utilized for meeting the non-plan
expenditure.
Plan Funds: Funds are provided under the plan budget with the prior approval of Planning
Commission and EFC for implementing various developments, promotional and R& D
programs.
PROGRAMS30
Promotional Support to Exporters
Promotional Support to Tea Association
Schemes for ICD, Amingaon
Tea Quality Improvement and Product Diversification Scheme
Tea Plantation Development Scheme XI Plan
Special Purpose Tea Fund Scheme March 2007
Special Purpose Tea Fund Scheme of Tea Board
Structure of the Borrowing Mechanism for the SPTF
T OBACCO BOARD
The government of India established the Tobacco Board under an Act of Parliament in 1975 and
opened its headquarters at Guntur, Andhra Pradesh to develop the tobacco industry.31 The board
aims at the planned development of the tobacco industry in the country. It regulates the
production and curing of Virginia Tobacco with regard to the demand in India and abroad.32
Tobacco is an important commercial crop grown in India. It occupies the third position in the
world with an annual production of about 725 million kg. Of the different type’s grown, flue-
cured tobacco, country tobacco, burley, bidi, rustica and chewing tobacco are considered
important. India, as an exporter of tobacco, ranks sixth in the world next to Brazil, China, United
States, Malawi and Italy. Tobacco and tobacco products earn an annual sum of about Rs.10271
crores to the national exchequer by way of excise revenue, and Rs.2022 Crores (2006-2007) by
way of foreign exchange. Furthermore, tobacco is a source of gainful employment. Several lakhs
of people thrive on this crop.33
Flue-cured growth, with an annual production of about 300 million kg., contributes a significant
amount of forex and excise earnings. Around 50 percent of the Flue-Cured Virginia (FCV)
tobacco produced is consumed domestically while the rest is exported to more than 100 countries
across the globe. Other tobacco types (i.e., Burley, country tobacco, chewing tobaccos (Lal
chopadia, Judi and Rustica)) are also exported whereas bidi tobacco—a poor man’s smoke—is
consumed only within the country.
FCV tobacco is the principal type grown in the states of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka under
varied agro-climatic conditions. It is grown in the light soils of Karnataka as a rain-fed crop and
in the heavy soils of Andhra Pradesh under conserved moisture in the aftermath of southwest
monsoon rains. The crop is grown under irrigated conditions in the Northern Light Soils (NLS)
of Andhra Pradesh and Eastern Light Soils (ELS) of Orissa and as a semi-monsoon crop in
Southern Light Soils (SLS) of Andhra Pradesh. Thus, India has the capability to produce
different types of tobacco.
ISO 9001:2008 C ERTIFICATION TO INDIAN TOBACCO B OARD
Det Norkse Veritas (DNV), Netherlands bestowed the honor of ISO 9001:2008 Certificate to the
Indian Tobacco Board for establishing quality management systems. The Tobacco Board has
implemented systems aimed at achieving product integrity and traceability, model project area
and quality circle concepts to improve the quality of tobacco leaf so as to meet the specifications
of importers. The board, committed to meeting the needs of customers, advises all the Indian
exporters to obtain ISO certification to meet the expectations of the global market.
EXTENSION SERVICES34
The Tobacco Board, having a wide network of qualified and trained technical staff, plays a
crucial role in improving yield and quality of FCV tobacco. The board implements various
extension and developmental programs for improving yield and quality of tobacco in
collaboration with the Central Tobacco Research Institute (CTRI), Rajahmundry and Research
and Developmental (R&D) wings of tobacco companies in the private sector.
The board implements the following extension and developmental activities for improving the
yield and quality of the tobacco, economy in fuel consumption, mechanization in tobacco
farming, transfer of technology, product integrity and post-harvest product management to help
promote exports.
TRANSFER OF TECHNOLOGIES
Training programs are organized for each of the 30 auction platforms in Andhra Pradesh (AP)
and Karnataka for the benefit of farmers and field staff in collaboration with CTRI and the
research wing of ITC – ILTD at different stages of crop growth to impart the latest knowledge on
crop production.
Study tours for farmers to research stations, the board’s model project area, on-farm trial
plots, Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs), green leaf threshing plants, auction platforms, to
enable them to get acquainted with the latest improved practices and adopt them in their
own fields.
Distribution of literature on the latest production technology.
Result-oriented demonstrations to demonstrate various latest methods of crop production
and varietal trials to test the performance of pipeline varieties under field conditions are
conducted by board in collaboration with CTRI every year.
Audio-visual publicity in villages on good agricultural practices during growers’
meetings.
Screening of short-films on good agricultural practices and latest improved technology
through cable network.
Workshops at CTRI research stations with growers.
Exclusive training programs to growers at CTRI research stations.
Organizing field visits of scientists from CTRI and executives from trade to adviser
growers on the latest package of practices and crop protection measures.
Model project area program in NLS and SLS of AP and KLS of Karnataka.
Intensive extension through demonstrating all good agricultural practices, latest
technologies, improved crop protection measures including Integrated Pest Management
(IPM), PHPM and INM in association with CTRI and trade. Frequent contacts with all
farmers in select areas.
NATIONAL DAIRY DEVELOPMENT B OARD (NDDB)
The NDDB, established 1965,35 is an institution setup by an act of Indian Parliament. The main
office is located in Anand, Gujarat with regional offices throughout the country. NDDB’s
subsidiaries include Mother Dairy, Delhi. It was founded by Dr. Verghese Kurien, and Dr.
Amrita Patel is the current chairman of the NDDB, Anand. The NDDB was created to extend the
success of the Kaira Cooperative Milk Producers’ Union (Amul) to other parts of India. The
general superintendence, direction, control and management of NDDB’s affairs and
business vests with the Board of Directors. www.nddb.org/aboutnddb.html
Major success was achieved through the World Bank financed Operation Flood, which lasted for
26 years from 1970 to 1996 and was responsible for making India the world’s largest producer of
milk. This operation started with the objective of increasing milk production, augmenting farmer
income and providing fair prices for consumers. The NDDB has now integrated 96,000 dairy
cooperatives in what it calls the Anand Pattern, linking the village society to the state federations
in a three-tier structure.
The NDDB launched its Perspective Plan 2010 with four thrust areas: quality assurance,
productivity enhancement, institution building and a national information network. The NDDB
was created to promote, finance and support producer-owned and controlled organizations.
NDDB’s programs and activities seek to strengthen farmer cooperatives and support national
policies that are favourable to the growth of such institutions. Fundamental to NDDB’s efforts
are cooperative principles and cooperative strategies.
GENESIS36
The NDDB began its operation with the goal of making dairying a vehicle to a better future for
millions of grassroots milk producers. The mission achieved thrust and direction with the
launching of Operation Flood.
As of March 2006, India’s 117,575 village dairy cooperatives federated into 170 milk unions,
and 15 federations procured on an average 21.5 million litres of milk every day. Presently, 12.4
million farmers are members of village dairy cooperatives. Since its inception, the NDDB has
planned and spearheaded India’s dairy programs by placing dairy development in the hands of
milk producers and the professionals they employ to manage their cooperatives. In addition, the
NDDB also promotes other commodity-based cooperatives, allied industries and veterinary
biologicals on an intensive and nation-wide basis.
OPERATION F LOOD: ONE OF THE WORLD’S LARGEST RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS37
Launched in 1970, Operation Flood has helped dairy farmers direct their own development,
placing control of the resources they create in their own hands. A National Milk Grid links milk
producers throughout India with consumers in over 700 towns and cities, reducing seasonal and
regional price variations while ensuring that the producer gets fair market prices in a transparent
manner. The bedrock of Operation Flood has been village milk producers’ cooperatives, which
procure milk and provide inputs and services, making modern management and technology
available to members. Operation Flood’s objectives included:
Increase milk production
Augment rural incomes
Ensure reasonable prices for consumers.
Operation Flood was implemented in three phases:
Phase-I: (1970-1980) was financed by the sale of skimmed milk powder and butter oil
gifted by the European Union then EEC through the World Food Program. The NDDB
planned the program and negotiated the details of EEC assistance. During its first phase,
Operation Flood linked 18 of India’s premier milk sheds with consumers in India’s four
major metropolitan cities: Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata and Chennai.
Phase-II: (1981-1985) increased the milk sheds from 18 to 136;290 urban markets
expanded the outlets for milk. By the end of 1985, a self-sustaining system of 43,000
village cooperatives covering 4.25 million milk producers had become a
reality. Domestic milk powder production increased from 22,000 tons in the pre-project
year to 140,000 tons by 1989, all of the increase coming from dairies set up under
Operation Flood. In this way EEC gifts and World Bank loans helped to promote self-
reliance. Direct marketing of milk by producers’ cooperatives increased by several
million litres a day.
Phase-III: (1985-1996) enabled dairy cooperatives to expand and strengthen the
infrastructure required to procure and market increasing volumes of milk. Veterinary
first-aid healthcare service, artificial insemination services and intensified education for
cooperative members were provided. Operation Flood’s Phase III consolidated India’s
dairy cooperative movement, adding 30,000 new dairy cooperatives to the 42,000
existing societies organized during Phase II. “Operation Flood can be viewed as a
twenty-year experiment confirming the Rural Development Vision” (World Bank Report
1997c).
COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT AND GOVERNANCE38
The NDDB implements cooperative development and governance programs across the
country. The aim is to help create self-reliant and professionally managed cooperative
institutions that are responsive to the economic and social expectations of their members. In
addition to helping build self-sustaining cooperatives, the NDDB is committed to serve its rural
constituency by including Women’s Development and Leadership Development Programs as a
central part of its activities. Need-based consultancy is provided to help advance strategies to
strengthen dairy cooperatives as well as to increase milk procurement. The NDDB assists in
Institution Building (IB), Enhancing Women Involvement in Cooperatives (EWIC) and
Strengthening Procurement Systems (SPS). In addition to our client organizations—state
cooperative milk marketing.
TRAINING AND CONSULTANCY39
In today’s increasingly competitive environment, the success of dairy cooperatives depends on
their people. Boards, chief executives, managers, field staff and workers must all match or
exceed the competence and commitment of their counterparts in investor-owned
organizations. Supporting cooperatives with technical training and professional expertise has
long been an NDDB priority. Over the years, the NDDB has developed the physical
infrastructure, the experience, the methods and training skills necessary to fulfil this
responsibility. The NDDB offers a variety of training programs as well as on-
demand consultations in various technical and functional areas. The scope of training and
consultation ranges from cooperative institution building to market studies and development and
from dairy plant management to feasibility and impact studies. Training programs are designed
in-house and are conducted by NDDB personnel who are specialists in the field. Most training
programs are designed exclusively for cooperative organizations.
FARMER EMPOWERMENT40
The NDDB was created to promote, finance and support producer-owned and controlled
organizations. Its programs and activities seek to strengthen farmer cooperatives and support
national policies that are favourable to the growth of such institutions. Fundamental to the
NDDB’s efforts are cooperative principles and cooperative strategies. The NDDB empowered
millions of small and marginal farmers through village dairy cooperatives. AMUL pattern
societies across the country made farmer rich in terms of tangible and intangible wealth.41
EMPOWERMENT OF WOMEN42
According to the 2001 census, the population of India is 1027 million, of which 496 million are
female inhabitants. In other words, 48 percent of the total population consist of women. For
sustainable economic and social development to take place in any country, it is essential that people
participate in the necessary economic and social process. The process of participation is complex,
and it is by no means clear that it is comprehensively inclusive. By this, we mean that it is not
possible to assume that all sections of the population take part effectively in the economic, social,
political and democratic processes of society. There are many reasons why people may not
participate—from apathy to a sense of helplessness. Women are one side of a coin—half in every
respect—so, why are they not so in socio-economic and political power? The NDDB, by affirmative
action, empowered women and made them involved in socio-economic activities.
National Horticulture Board (NHB)
The NHB 43 was set up by the government of India in 1984 as an autonomous society under the
Societies Registration Act of 1860 with a mandate to promote integrated development in
horticulture; to help in coordinating, stimulating and sustaining the production and processing of
fruits and vegetables and to establish a sound infrastructure in the field of production, processing and
marketing with a focus on post-harvest management to reduce losses. http://nhb.gov.in
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF NHB PROGRAMS
Development of hi-tech commercial horticulture in identified belts.
Development of modern post-harvest management infrastructure as an integral part of
area expansion projects or as a common facility for a cluster of projects.
Development of integrated, energy efficient, cold-chain infrastructure for fresh
horticulture products.
Popularization of identified new technologies, tools and techniques for
commercialization/adoption, after carrying out technology needs assessment.
Assistance in securing availability of quality planting material by promoting the
establishment of scion and root stock banks/mother plant nurseries, carrying out
accreditation/rating of horticulture nurseries and identifying needed imports of planting
material.
Promotion and market development of fresh horticulture produce.
Promotion of field trials of newly developed or imported planting materials and other
farm inputs, production technology, PHM protocols, INM and Integrated Pest
Management (IPM) protocols and applied Research and Development (R&D) programs
for commercialization of proven technology.
Promotion of applied R&D for standardizing PHM protocols, prescribing critical storage
conditions for fresh horticulture produce, benchmarking technical standards for cold-
chain infrastructure, etc.,
Transfer of technology to producers/farmers and service providers such as gardeners,
farm-level skilled workers, operators in cold storages, workforce carrying out post-
harvest management, including processing of fresh horticulture produce.
Promotion of the consumption of horticulture produce and products.
Setting up common facility centers in horticulture parks and Agri-Export Zones (AEZs).
Strengthen market intelligence systems by developing, collecting and disseminating a
horticulture database.
Carrying out studies and surveys to identify constraints and develop short- and long-term
strategies for systematic development of horticulture and providing technical services
including advisory and consultation services.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS44
The Board of Directors supervises the management of the NHB, which is headed by the union
Agriculture Minister as its president and union Minister of State for Agriculture as its vice-
president. The other members of the board are:
Secretary, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation (DAC), (Ex-Officio)
Director General, Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), (Ex-Officio)
Horticulture Commissioner, DAC, (Ex-Officio)
Financial Advisor, Department of Agriculture & Cooperation (Ex-Officio)
Chairman, Agriculture and Processed Food Products Export Development
Authority (APEDA), (Ex-Officio)
Executive Director, NHB, (Ex-Officio)
Eight representatives in the horticulture industry representing the interests of
cooperative societies, leading horticulturists and leading exporters of horticulture
produce (nominated by state government)
A representative each from the food processing industry, the Ministry of Shipping
and Transport, the Ministry of Railways, the Ministry of Civil Aviation and
Tourism and any other ministry who may be invited specially with the consent of
the president, (Ex-Officio)
MANAGING COMMITTEE
The managing committee is headed by the Union Secretary (Department of Agriculture and
Cooperation (DAC)) as its chairman. This is the role of general superintendence, direction and
control over the affairs and functions of the board. The composition of the managing committee
is:
Secretary, DAC, Chairman
Additional Secretary/Special Secretary In-Charge of Horticulture, DAC, Member
Advisor (Agriculture Planning Commission) or his representative, Member
Financial Advisor, DAC, Member
Chairman, Agriculture and Processed Products Export Development Authority
(APEDA), Member
Horticulture Commissioner, DAC, Member
General Manager, NABARD, Member
Managing Director, NHB, Member Secretary
CASHEW EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL (CEPC)
The CEPC was established by the government of India in 1955. The aim of the CEPC is
promoting exports of cashew kernels and cashew nut shell liquid from India. The council
provides the necessary institutional framework for performing the different functions that serve
to intensify and promote exports of cashew kernels and cashew nut shell liquid.45
CASHEW NUT DIRECTORATE
India is the world’s largest cashew producer and exporter, producing an estimated 385,000
metric tons of seeds on more than 500,000 hectares in 1994. India is the leading cashew supplier
to the United States, all of the major European markets, the Middle East, Russia, Eastern Europe,
Australia and Japan. Within India, the states of Kerala, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh,
Goa, Tamil Nadu as well as states in the northeast are top cashew cultivators. India set new
cashew export records each year from 1992 to 1994, peaking in marketing from April 1994 to
March 1995 with 76,900 metric tons worth more than US$400 million. In fact, according to the
Indian CEPC, cashews were India’s largest agricultural foreign exchange earner during 1994 to
1995. Varieties of cashew grown in India are Vengurla 1, Vengurla 2, Vengurla 3, Vengurla 4,
Vengurla 5, Vengurla 6, Bhubaneswar, Kanaka and Dhana.46
History: Four centuries ago, the Portuguese brought the cashew to India. Cashew cultivation
now covers a total area of 0.70 million hectares of land, producing over 0.40 million M.T. of raw
cashew nuts annually. By the end of the century, India’s goal is to achieve a production level of
over 0.60 million M.T. of raw cashew nuts. The cashew tree is a short, stocky, low-spreading,
evergreen tropical tree. It flowers once a year, between the months of November and January.
The fruit ripens fully within two months.47
CEPC of India: By its very set up, the CEPC provides the necessary institutional framework for
performing the different functions that serve to intensify and promote exports of cashew kernels
and cashew nut shell liquid. The council serves as the necessary liaison for bringing together
foreign importers with member exporters of cashew kernels. The inquiries received from the
foreign importers are circulated amongst council members. The council also settles complaints
amicably in the matter of exports/imports either on account of quality and/or variation in
fulfilment of contractual obligations.48
Directorate of Cashew Nut Development: The Directorate of Cashew Nut Development came
into being in 1966 at Cochin as a subordinate office of the Union Ministry of Agriculture with its
primary objective being development of the cashew nut in the country. Development of cocoa
was transferred to this Directorate in 1998. The Directorate of Cashew Nut and Cocoa
Development is responsible for formulation and coordination of development programs. The
Directorate maintains a close liaison with the state governments and other state-level agencies in
the course of development. 49
The Directorate conducts comprehensive studies on various aspects of cashew nut and cocoa
development including production, prices, marketing and other related problems. It has been
instrumental in the dissemination of technical information and research findings of practical
value through publications. The Institute of the Directorate has helped in the adoption of
improved technology for production and availability of assured quality planting material. The
Directorate also publishes its journal regularly.50
The major objectives with which the Directorate functions are:
Formulation and execution of various development programs on cashew nut and cocoa in the
country.
Monitoring the effective implementation of the development programs in the states.
Functioning as a feedback agency for the Development and Research Institutes in the country
for planning and executing cashew nut and cocoa production, marketing and other allied
programs.
Exploiting the waste lands for the development of cashews in public- and private-sector
lands.
Rendering technical advice and suggestions to remove the bottlenecks confronting execution
of development programs.
Shouldering the responsibility of reviewing the development programs, taking steps for
adoption and dissemination of advanced techniques in respect to production, processing and
marketing, assessing the requirements and fulfilling the needs of the project with specific
reference to input requirements and identifying sources of supply.
Functioning as a data bank on crop, area production, price trends, marketing and trade
performance of export, import and internal situations.
Functioning as an advisory body to recommend, watch and monitor the various aspects of
crop development, marketing and bi-product utilization.
Assisting in improving the marketing of the commodity.
Maintaining close ties with states and central institutions.
Taking up intensive publicity measures such as publishing journals, pamphlets, etc. and
participation in seminars and exhibitions.
NATIONAL J UTE B OARD
The National Jute Board, a statutory body set up by the National Jute Board Act of 2008 is under
the administrative control of the Ministry of Textiles. The board has been constituted by merging
the two organizations: 1) Jute Manufactures Development Council (JMDC)—a statutory body
set up by the Jute Manufactures Development Council Act of 1983 and the 2) National Center
for Jute Diversification (NCJD)—a society set up by the central government and registered under
the Societies Registration Act, 1860.
www.worldjute.com/organisation/organisation_index.html#National%20Jute%20Board%20of%
20India
HISTORY51
For centuries, jute has been an integral part of Bengali culture, which is shared by both
Bangladesh and West Bengal of India. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, much of the raw jute
fiber of Bengal was exported to the United Kingdom, where it was then processed in mills, but
this trade had largely ceased by about 1970 due to the entrance of synthetic fibers.
Since that time, Indian jute has come a long way. The invention of new end-uses along with the
preference for eco-friendly and bio-degradable products around the world have been important
factors for the increasing demand for jute products. Jute has entered many diverse sectors of
industry where natural fibers are gradually becoming better substitutes. Among these industries
are paper, celluloid products (films), non-woven textiles, composites (pseudo-wood), and
geotextiles.
Jute
Jute is a long, soft, shiny vegetable fiber that can be spun into coarse, strong threads. It is
produced from plants in the genus Corchorus. Jute is one of the cheapest natural fibers and is
second only to cotton in amount produced and variety of uses. It falls into the bast fiber category
(fiber collected from bast or skin of the plant). The industrial term for jute fiber is raw jute. The
fibers are off-white to brown, and 1 to 4 meters (3 to 12 feet) long.
Jute is a leafy, reed-like plant. It thrives under hot, humid, monsoon conditions growing to
typically 3 meters in height over a period of 4 to 6 months. Ancient manuscripts mention jute as
early as 800 B.C., when its leaves were used as a vegetable or for medicinal purpose. Cultivation
of jute was not developed to any great extent, however, until the nineteenth century.
The story of jute as a commercial fiber began with the initiative of the East India Company when
it sent samples of jute, then known as “Indian Grass” to the United Kingdom in 1791. Some 30
years later, jute was introduced to Dundee, which had been a center for weaving coarse textiles
for several hundred years and was, therefore, the best place in the United Kingdom for the newly
imported fiber. From woollens, Dundee concentrated on linens made from the fiber of the flax
plant and it was the flax linen industry that jute largely superseded. Another factor that
established jute in Dundee was the discovery that by softening jute fibre with whale oil it was
possible to spin it into yarn on flax spinning frames. At that time, Dundee was a whaling port and
a ready source of whale oil. Today mineral oil is used to soften jute.
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF COOPERATIVE SUGAR FACTORIES, LTD (NFCSF)
The NFCSF was registered on December 2, 1960 as the head, national-level organization of all
cooperative sugar factories in India. The NFCSF is an autonomous organization governed by the
Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act of the government of India. The NFCSF was established
at a time when there were only 30 cooperative sugar factories producing 14.9 percent of the total
production. Under the guidance of the NFCSF, the capacity of the existing cooperative sugar
factories was increased, new cooperative sugar factories set up, yield and recovery improved and
sugar production increased. Today the cooperative sector of the sugar industry is responsible for
about 45 per cent of the national production of sugar. http://coopsugar.org/index.php
The NFCSF has representation on various ministries/forums of Indian government like the
Ministry of Agriculture, Food, Commerce, Consumer Affairs, etc. The NFCSF has been behind
the phenomenal growth of the Indian sugar industry, particularly in the cooperative sector
through its Technical Cell created in 1977. It has provided technical and managerial services to
about 160 new sugar mills with capacities ranging from 1250 TCD to 10000 TCD and to 70
existing mills in implementing their technology enhancement, expansion, modernization and
rehabilitation projects. The NFCSF, having its corporate office in New Delhi, exists to advance
the economic betterment of cane growers in India.
OBJECTIVES
o To advocate, promote and safeguard the interests of its members in accordance with the
cooperative principles.
o To arrange education and training for the benefit of its members.
o To arrange for technical support and services to its members both for improving their
operational efficiency as well as for organization and promotion of new cooperative sugar
factories:
o To assist in technical enhancements to improve recovery, improve sugar quality, reduce
losses and add value to bi-products.
o To provide technical advice and assist in the selection, purchase, installation and
maintenance of plants and machinery.
o To prepare a Detailed Project Report.
o To assist in standardizing the accounting and cost methods and practices.
o To assist in securing necessary financial help from the state government, the central
government and Fis as per procedure.
o To advise on:
The sale of produce from sugar factories.
The purchase of chemicals, gunny bags.
The utilization of bi-products.
o To promote Research and Development (R&D) activities for its members and to sponsor
research projects, conferences, seminars, etc. to discover solutions to the problems of its
member cooperative sugar factories and allied subjects.
o To act as an accredited representative and spokesman organization for the sector of
cooperative sugar factories at the policy I of central and state governments, business I and
organizations relating to the sugar industry; to establish relationships with national and
international organizations and others allied to the sugar industry.
o To advise and assist its members in matters related to their management and operations.
o To undertake information services for the benefit of its members.
o To publish literature and documents on the sugar industry for the benefit of its members.
o To undertake other activities that are incidental and conducive to the attainment of its
objectives and to the interest of its members for the development and progress of sugar
and its bi-product industries either directly or through strategically collaborative ventures
or partnerships with organizations, including insurance, within India and abroad.
TECHNICAL SERVICES
The technical and promotional cell comprising experts in various fields (i.e., engineering, sugar
technology, sugar agronomy, financial management, workforce planning, bi-products, etc.) of the
NFCSF has been providing technical and promotional services to its member cooperative sugar
factories in order to improve their technical performance. The main objectives of the cell are to
provide technical knowhow, advice and other assistance in selection, purchase, installation,
operation and maintenance of plant and machinery, assistance in selection of technical personnel
for member factories and advice on and means to increase capacity utilization and operational
efficiency of existing sugar factories. The cell has also provided its services for the establishment
of new cooperative sugar factories in different parts of the country from inception to
commissioning (i.e., preparation of project and feasibility reports, cane development, site
selection, tender documents for plant and machinery, project scheduling, workforce planning,
inspection of plant and machinery, project monitoring, building, commissioning and so forth). In
case of working sugar factories, the cell has prepared projects for modernization/expansion
programs, energy conservation, improvement in working efficiency, improvement in quality of
sugar and optimization of crushing capacity.
CONCLUSION
As Rivera at al. (2003) reported that, a pluralistic extension system demands that programmes be
jointly planned, implemented and evaluated by all service providers, in active collaboration with
farmers. The role of the government becomes crucial in a pluralistic extension situation in terms
of national policy direction, coordination and quality control to safeguard the interest of farming
communities. Similarly, all these commodity boards are statutory bodies working under either
ministry of Agriculture, Commerce or Textile jointly. These boards are functioning for the
benefit of the producer farmers, entrepreneurs and nation as whole. In order to disseminate the
latest technologies and provide other services to the beneficiaries, every board is using some
mechanism to transfer the technologies. But there functioning systems are different from the
other. In some cases the linkages of commodity boards with research organizations are also not
very strong though it is very essential.
Since extension network has increased in India and density is increasing day by day due to
opening a number of KVK and ATMA centers, these boards need to get mutual benefit of these
existing extension infrastructures. Most of the commodity boards are providing not only advice
but also the inputs, marketing and credit to the producers for their mutual benefits in coordinated
package. This is nobility of the system. In addition CDs generate a millions of job opportunities
in rural areas for farmers and farm women. Therefore, the farmers feel very safe and
comfortable working with these boards. It acts in PPP mode where every partner is benefited
and become part as supplementary and complementary to each other.
Review based SWOT analysis of commodity based extension is having more strengths and
opportunities than weaknesses and threats. Farmers are in fact ready to pay for the input cost but
in many places availability of inputs on time and market is problem for them in conventional
extension systems. Three lessons may be drawn from this chapter, the first is that the concerned
ministries, commodity boards, KVKs, ATMA centers, input agencies and other Government and
NGOs engaged in extension may think jointly to disseminate need base and location specific
technologies along with inputs and markets to the end users. The second lesson may be that
many other commodities which do not have boards, need to establish commodity boards for
them to make farmers more secure and increase the production and productivity in years to
come. Finally, other extension systems must change their strategy and include input supply,
credit and marketing along with extension education for the end users.
Endnotes:
1. http://www.ibef.org/india/indiaatglance.aspx
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_India
3. http://agriexchange.apeda.gov.in/Ready%20Reckoner/AGRI%20EXPORT.aspx
4. http://www.fnbnews.com/article/detnews.asp?articleid=30326§ionid=34
5. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTARD/Resources/3358071330620492317/847
8371-1330712142266/Module3-TN1.pdf
6. http://indiansilk.kar.nic.in/central_silk_board.html
7. http://www.thomex.com/Industrylink/exportpromotion.html#26
8. http://indiansilk.kar.nic.in/silks_of_india.html
9. http://indiansilk.kar.nic.in/csb_services.html
10. http://www.indiansilk.kar.nic.in/body_csb_services.html
11. http://www.indiansilk.kar.nic.in/body_csb_services.html
12. htp:// www.indiansilk.kar.nic.in/sericulture.html
13. http:// www.indiansilk.kar.nic.in/r___d.html
14. http://www.indiansilk.kar.nic.in/jica/english.htm#1
15. http://www.coconutboard.nic.in/cdb.htm
16. http://business.gov.in/agriculture/organisational_plantation_crops.php
17. http://www.indiacoffee.org/indiacoffee.php?page=Aboutus
18. http://coirboard.nic.in/aboutcoir.htm
19. http://agritech.tnau.ac.in/horticulture/horti_schemes_commodity%20boards.html#tea
20. http://rubberboard.org.in/ManageAboutUs.asp?Id=5&DbAction=1
21. http://rubberboard.org.in/training.asp
22. http://agritech.tnau.ac.in/horticulture/horti_schemes_commodity%20boards.html#tea
23. http://www.indianspices.com/
24. http://www.thomex.com/Industrylink/exportpromotion.html#26
25. http://www.indianspices.com/html/spices_board_intro.htm
26. http://www.indianspices.com/html/spices_board_resrchl_indcardins.htm
27. http://agritech.tnau.ac.in/horticulture/horti_schemes_commodity%20boards.html#tea
28. http://www.thomex.com/Industrylink/exportpromotion.html#26
29. http://www.teaboard.gov.in/inner1.asp?param_link_id=110
30. http://agritech.tnau.ac.in/horticulture/horti_schemes_commodity%20boards.html#tea
31. http://tobaccoboard.com/content/view/12/50/lang,english/
32. http://www.thomex.com/Industrylink/exportpromotion.html#26
33. http://tobaccoboard.com/content/view/12/50/lang,english/
34. http://tobaccoboard.com/content/view/58/74/lang,english
35. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Dairy_Development_Board
36. http://www.nddb.org/aboutnddb/genesis.html
37. http://www.nddb.org/aboutnddb/operationflood.html
38. http://www.nddb.org/core_competencies/cooperative.html
39. http://agritech.tnau.ac.in/banking/crbank_nddb.html#research
40. http://www.nddb.org/aboutnddb.html
41. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Dairy_Development_Board#cite_note-0
42. http://nhb.gov.in/
43. http://nhb.gov.in
44. http://www.thomex.com/Industrylink/exportpromotion.html#26
45. http://www.agriculture-industry-india.com/agricultural-commodities/cashew.html
46. http://www.cashewindia.org/php/cepcContents.php?CatID=2
47. http://www.kissankerala.net/kissan/kissancontents/others.jsp
48. http://www.kissankerala.net/kissan/kissancontents/others.jsp#rubber
49. http://business.gov.in/agriculture/organisational_plantation_crops.p
50. http://www.jute.com/HTML/Jute_History.htm
51. https://www.TOWS+Matrix+fred+David+Stratigic+Management&oq
52. http://www.nabard.org/farm_sector/agri_com.asp
53. http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/AC913E/ac913e08.htm
References
Central Silk Board (2009-10). Annual Report, Central Silk Board, Ministry of Textiles-Govt. of
India
Coffee Board (2009-10). 2009-10 a perspective view - 70th Annual Report of the Coffee
Board.
FAO (1997). Improving Agricultural Extension: A reference Manual. Chapter-2. Rome
FAO (1997). Improving Agricultural Extension: A reference Manual. Chapter-21. Rome
FAO (2002). Strengthening the pluralistic agricultural extension system: a Zimbabwean case.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome
G. L. Ray (1991). Extension Communication and Management. Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi
GOI (2010). National Horticulture Mission-Operational Guidelines, Ministry of Agriculture and
Cooperation, Government of India.
Planning Commission (1989). Agro climatic zones of India Planning commission 1989
Sapovadia, V.K. and Achuthan, S, Role of a Woman Leader in Cooperative Dairy Movement:
Story of Nddb - Woman Empowering Women. 4th Research Conference of ICA at
Colombo Sri Lanka, 2006. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=954979
The Hindu: Business Line(2012). Restructuring of Commodity boards on Cards: Scindia.
Addressing the 54th annual conference of the Karnataka Planters’ Association, Bangalore,
Sept.28, 2012.
United Nations Development Programme (1991). Programme Advisory Note Agricultural
Extension, UNDP, New York
Rivera, W.M. and Qamar, M.K. (2003). A new extension vision for food security: Challenges
to change. Sustainable Development Department
Chapter-6
Extension Institutions for Capacity Building
M.N. Reddy
Agricultural practices are changing every day with the development of new techniques. To make
the best of emerging technologies, it is vital that agricultural and other extension functionaries
receive continuous education and training. Various agencies are currently involved in providing
training to extension workers at district, state, regional and national levels. The State
Agriculture Universities (SAUs) are other major partners in the growth and development of
agricultural research and education under the National Agriculture Extension System
(NAES). The SAUs are responsible for research, training and dissemination of agricultural
related information within the state. In addition, Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs) of the Indian
Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) are operational at the district level.
These institutes are mainly responsible for testing, refining and transferring agricultural
technologies and are meant to bridge the production gaps and provide self-employment
opportunities within the farming community. Training of district/block extension functionaries
in production technology is one of the mandates of the KVKs. In addition, the Ministry of
Agriculture, Government of India, established state, regional and national-level institutes to
address extension management, communication and marketing needs of the extension policy
makers, development administrators, field-level extension functionaries, Non-Governmental
Organizations (NGOs), the private sector and other stakeholders. The following are the institutes
established to meet the aforementioned training needs.
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION MANAGEMENT (MANAGE)
MANAGE is an autonomous organization, established in 1987 under the Ministry of Agriculture,
Government of India. It is the Indian response to challenges in agricultural extension service
delivery to farmers in a rapidly growing and diverse agricultural sector. The policies of
liberalization, globalization of the economy and the increasing level of sophistication and
complexity of agricultural technology called for major reorientation and modernization of the
agricultural extension system. Effective ways of managing the extension system needs to be
created and extension organizations need to be empowered to transform the existing system
through professional guidance and training of critical work force. MANAGE was established in
response to this imperative need.
To provide adequate flexibility in operations, the institute was promoted as an autonomous
society. The mandate of MANAGE is to assist the Government of India and the state
governments in order to help improve extension delivery systems through appropriate changes in
policies, programs and skill development of extension personnel.
Mandate
Developing linkages between prominent state, regional, national and international
institutions concerned with agricultural extension management and also agricultural
development
Gaining insight into agricultural extension management systems and policies
Forging collaborative linkages with national and international institutions for sharing
faculty resources
Developing and promoting the application of modern management tools for improving
the effectiveness of agricultural extension organizations
Organizing needs-based training for senior and middle-level agricultural extension
personnel
Conducting problem-oriented studies on agricultural extension management
Functioning as an international documentation center for collecting, storing, processing
and disseminating information on subjects related to agricultural extension management.
Organizational Structure
The general body is headed by the Union Minster for Agriculture and meets once every six
months to make policy decisions for the institute. The Executive Committee consists of 12
members, nominated by the President from amongst the members of the general body. The
Executive Committee consists of the members who hold office for the same duration for which
the general body is constituted. The Executive Council headed by the Secretary, Department of
Agriculture and Cooperation, meet once in three months to review the activities and approve the
annual action plans.
Human Resources
MANAGE is supported by well-trained faculty in the areas of extension organization, system
planning and management, agricultural extension and communication methods, human resources
development, information technology, monitoring and evaluation, natural resources management
and women in agriculture. In addition, it has a unique system of developing the national
facilitators from various states in the key areas of MANAGE and using them as resources in the
capacity building programs of the institute. Faculty are supported by the administrative and
accounting staff.
MANAGE offers its services in the following five streams viz.,
1. Management Training
2. Consultancy
3. Management Education
4. Research
5. Information Services
Organizational Structure:
The Union Minister of Agriculture is the president of the General Body of NIAM and the
Secretary of the Department of Agriculture and Cooperation is the Chairman of the Executive
Committee (see Figure 7.2 on next page). The General Body will meet once in six months to
make policy decisions for the institute. The Executive Committee consists of 12 members,
nominated by the President from amongst the members of the General Body and meet once
every three months.
Organizational Structure
The institute is headed by the director and supported by the teaching and administrative staff. A
Management Committee has been constituted to help in effective functioning and improving the
quality of training to be conducted at EEI with the following members, which constitute the
Management Committee:
1. Vice-Chancellor, State Agricultural University (SAU) Chairman
2. Director, EEI Member
Secretary
3. Director of Extension Education, SAU. Member
4. The Comptroller, SAU Member
From the State Department of Agriculture:
5. Director of Agriculture, Client States (on rotation) Member
6. The Director of Horticulture Member
7. Director of Livestock Production Member
8. The Director of Fisheries Member
It should be mentioned that the Management Committee meets once in a year to review and
discuss the activities of EEI.
EEI, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad emerged as one of the India’s four regional institutes stands to a
notable premier training provider in Southern India with efficient, reliable and cost effective
solutions to meet the emerging challenges in agriculture and allied sectors. The institute
undertakes various activities such as organization of on campus and off campus training
programmes, consultancy services to development agencies, action research and documentation.
The institute is specialized to cater to the training needs of middle level extension functionaries
of line departments of client states viz., Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Kerala,
Odisha, Union territories of Puducherry, Andaman & Nicobar and Lakshadweep Islands. Besides
this, the trainers of training institutes like SAMETIs, FTCs and KVKs are also trained at this
institute.
EEI as a guiding force shapes the personal and professional outlook of the extension officers of
various client states and never stops going that extra mile ahead in providing greater value of
training in terms of quality, quantity and promoting client satisfaction by following a highly
application oriented and participative style of training. Only after understanding the quality and
skilled work force requirements of the sector, the institute designs the course content. The
institute has created a record of cent percent client coverage and satisfaction with respect to
quality and quantity.
This Institute coordinates with organizations like MANAGE, SAMETIs, ICAR Organizations,
NGOs, Farmer Federations etc., to provide training to extension functionaries and lead farmers
on recent advancements in agriculture and allied sectors. Since inception up to March, 2013, the
institute trained 21388 officers of development departments of client states, union territories
including the farmers.
On Campus Training Programmes during 2012-13
S No. Title of the Training Programme
GENERAL COUNCIL:
State Minister of Agriculture President
Principle Secretary (Agriculture) Vice President
Director of Agriculture Member
Vice Chancellor, State Agricultural University (SAU) Member
Director, Central Research Institutes Member
Director General, MANAGE . Member
Director, EEI Member
Director of Horticulture Member
Director of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Science Member
Director of Fisheries Member
Commissioner/Director, SIRD Member
Secretary to Government Finance Department Member
Commissioner Rural Development Member
Chief Conservator of Forests Member
Director, Sericulture Member
One District Head from each district relating to
Agriculture, Horticulture and Animal Husbandry Member
Project Director, Agricultural Technology Management Member
Agency (ATMA)
Reputed person recognized in the field of Agriculture
as nominated by the President Member
Two farmer representatives nominated by
Executive Council Members
Director General, WALAMTARI Member
Director, State Agricultural Management and Convener/Member
Extension Training Institute (SAMETI)
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL:
The Executive Council is responsible for the management and administration of the affairs of
SAMETI in accordance with the rules and by-laws made there under for the furtherance of its
objectives and it has all powers which may be necessary or expedient for the purpose. The
members are:
Principal Secretary, Agricultural and Cooperative Department Chairman
Commissioner and Director of Agriculture Member
Director of Horticulture Member
Vice-Chancellor, State Agricultural University (SAU) Member
Representative from Finance Department Member
Director of Extension, SAU Member
Director General/Representative of MANAGE Member
Director, State Agricultural Management and Convener
Extension Training Institute (SAMETI)
Academic Committee:
The academic committee deals with annual training programs and consultant research studies
sponsored by the Government of India, government of Andhra Pradesh and other agencies in the
state and in India. The Academic Committee consists of the following members:
1. Director of State Agricultural Management and Extension Training Institute
(SAMETI) is the chairman of the Academic Committee
2. Representatives from Agriculture, Horticulture, Soil Conservation, Animal
Husbandry and Fisheries departments who are not below the rank of Joint Director
3. Three faculty members of SAMETI nominated by the Director of SAMETI
4. Director of EEI
Human and Financial Resources:
The faculty of SAMETI consists of experts in the areas of extension management,
communication methods, information technology, participatory extension management, human
resource development, etc. Also, SAMETI is a non-profit organization partially funded by the
Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Government of India. The
state government will meet 10 percent of the budget of the institute.
All the training institutions are playing significant role in undertaking the need based training
programs for national, regional and state level extension functionaries of agriculture and allied
sectors. Besides trainings they are also taking up consultancy services, special studies and
orientation workshops for innovative farmers along with the follow-up visits to client states. The
capacity building programs are finalized by organizing training planning workshops at state,
regional and national level. The course modules and content of the training programs will be
revised from time to time based on the changing needs of the functionaries. The performance of
the training institutes will be reviewed internally and also with external agencies regularly.
References
Annual report (2011-12); Ch. Charan Singh National Institute of Agricultural Marketing, Kota
Road, Bambala, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur.
Annual Report (2011-12); National Institute of Agricultural Extension
Management, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad
Annual Report (2011-12);Extension Education Institute, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad.
Annual Report (2011-12); State Agricultural Management and Extension Training
Institute, Hyderabad.
Annual Report (2011-12); Directorate of Extension, Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of
India, New Delhi.
www.ccsniam.gov.in
Chapter-7
Policy Framework for Strengthening
Pluralistic Extension Systems
K. M. Singh, M. N. Reddy, M.S. Meena and B.E. Swanson
INTRODUCTION
Public extension by itself can no longer respond to the multifarious demands of farming systems.
In many countries, the problems of establishing or maintaining an effective agricultural
extension service can be traced back to the lack of a realistic policy or an unstable policy
framework for charting the mission of the extension system. The common problems that
highlight the issue of extension policy are lack of agreement on the functions of extension, the
clientele to be served, how extension will be financed, frequent changes in organizational
structure and programme priorities, rapid turnover of the extension staff, and the proliferation
and lack of coordination between different organizations that undertake extension work.
Additionally, extension must be responsive to changes in the agricultural sector, the drive toward
market reforms, and shrinking government budgets. The importance of extension policy was
recognized by the Food and Agricultural Organisation’s (FAO) Global Consultation on
Agricultural Extension; when it recommended that "all national governments should develop and
periodically review their agricultural extension policy. This policy should include the goals of
agricultural extension, the responsible agencies and personnel, the clientele to be served, the
broad programmatic areas to be addressed, and other relevant guidelines”.
The FAO, in cooperation with the donor community, should engage in policy dialogue with
national governments to stress the importance of agricultural extension in national agricultural
development and the need to have an explicit, formally enacted, agricultural extension policy
(Swanson, 1990, p. 11). Agricultural extension policy is a part of national development policy in
general and of agricultural and rural development policy in particular. Hence, agricultural extension is one
of the policy instruments which governments can use to stimulate agricultural development (Van den Ban
in Jones, 1986, p. 91). However, formulating and enacting a sound, comprehensive and useful
extension policy is a difficult undertaking (Coutts, 1994). As the nature and scope of agricultural
extension undergoes fundamental changes, India looks for a whole new policy mix that nurtures
the pluralistic extension system in India. However, the impacts of some important extension
reforms have been discussed in earlier chapters.
POLICY FRAMEWORK FOR AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION
Agricultural extension plays a crucial role in meeting the holistic needs to increase agricultural
production in a sustainable manner. Reforms in the system envisage a pluralistic extension
system that is more broad-based and holistic in content and scope—beyond agricultural
technology transfer. Its normal task of transferring and disseminating appropriate technologies
and agronomic practices will not be sufficient. Extension agencies, services and workers will
need to exercise a more proactive and participatory role, serving as knowledge/information
agents in which they initiate and facilitate mutually meaningful and equitable knowledge based
transactions among agricultural researchers, trainers and primary producers. All this needs to be
done in an effective and cost efficient manner. Technology generation and its application will
have to focus more strongly than before on the themes of optimization of resources available to
producers, sustainability and adaption of technology to cope with diversity. More specifically,
agro-ecological or social circumstances are aimed at the creation of a policy environment that
promotes profitable, productive and sustainable farms. Reforms in agricultural extension
(http://agricoop.nic.in) have been initiated and are to be undertaken on a wider scale, which will
be discussed under the following sub-heads.
1. Policy Reforms
Farming Systems Approach
Policy reforms in agricultural extension envisage replacement of the old single-discipline,
commodity-oriented approach of the Training and Visit (T&V) system by the farming systems
approach. The farming systems approach considers the farm, farm household and off-farm
activities in a holistic way to take care of not only farming but all aspects of nutrition, food
security, sustainability, risk minimization, income and employment generation, which make up
the multiple objectives of farm households. This approach considers interdependencies of the
components under the control of members of the household, as well as how these components
interact with the physical, biological and socio-economic factors not under the household's
control. The farming systems approach emphasizes that research and extension agendas should
be determined by explicitly defined farmers' needs through an understanding of existing farming
systems rather than the perceptions by research scientists or extension functionaries.
A key factor in improving these feedback systems is organizing farmers into functional groups—
such as Self-Help Groups (SHGs), Farmer Interest Groups (FIGs), Commodity Associations
(CAs) and other types of Farmer Organizations (FOs). These FOs can provide an effective
channel for (i) the dissemination of technology to large numbers of small and marginal farmers
and (ii) giving feedback to research and extension. Linkage mechanisms would also ensure
meaningful farmer representation in the governing bodies of public and private extension
services, farmer influence on planning decisions, implementation and monitoring of public
extension (at the local, block, district and regional levels) and farmer influence on incentives for
extension staff, including supervisors and subject matter specialists (SMSs).
Thrust on Market Extension
Farmers have increasingly begun to perceive marketing, rather than production, as the major
constraint in enhancing their farm incomes. With extension agencies primarily focusing on
production techniques, marketing has not yet received much attention. This situation takes on
greater significance in light of the new international trading regime under the World Trade
Organization (WTO) and the export opportunities being opened up. Public extension
functionaries are presently ill-equipped to deal with the need to focus on agricultural marketing
in extension. India’s multi-agency extension service will need to address marketing through
strengthening the capacity of the public extension system, as well as supporting the private sector
and making extensive use of media in information and technology dissemination. Marketing,
which has so far been a peripheral issue in the extension scenario, will need to be brought center-
stage. Indeed, production will now need to be significantly dictated by market requirements.
Public Funds for Private and Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) Extension Services
Promotion of private extension needs to be matched by corresponding shifts in the allocation of
public resources. Short-tern public funds could be made available on a short-term basis to NGOs,
farmer associations, para-professionals or private foundations for extension work. An
environment, in which private investment in technology generation and transfer is more
attractive, will have to be created.
2. Institutional Restructuring
No uniform extension system will serve as a panacea to all states. Even within states there will
be a combination of various agencies and different institutional arrangements to address the
needs of different agro-climatic zones as well as different groups of farmers. However, public
extension will continue to remain central to the intensification and diversification of farming
systems, especially for small-scale and marginal men and women farmers, especially in
economically-challenged regions.
A key aim is to decentralize decision-making and bring it to the district level through the creation
of the ATMA—a registered society. A second goal is to increase farmer input in program
planning and resource allocation, especially at the block level, and to increase accountability to
stakeholders. A third major goal is to increase program coordination and integration between
departments so that the following program directions can be more effectively and efficiently
implemented, including:
Developing Strategic Research and Extension Plans (SREPs) by first carrying out
Participatory Rural Appraisals (PRAs)
In the process of creating a more bottom-up extension system, PRA procedures should be carried
out across all system levels (i.e. district, block/mandal and village) and across all participating
line department [Department of Agriculture (DOA), Department of Horticulture (DOH),
Department of Animal Husbandry (DAH) and Department of Marketing (DOM), etc.]; and
across research institutions [Zonal Research Stations (ZRSs) and KVKs] within each district. On
the basis of conducting a PRA, then the SREPs should be prepared for each district. Also, each
district’s SREP must be grounded at the block/mandal level, where extension programs can be
fine-tuned to the needs of both men and women farmers and more effectively implemented. The
SREP would take into account the research, training and extension requirements for production
as well as marketing activities. The rural periodic markets and wholesale assembling markets,
where farmers visit regularly, would be used as important locations for disseminating market and
production technologies.
First, they should be able to carry out a systematic needs assessment to prioritize farmer
problems. Then, by utilizing the strengthened cadre of research and extension specialists (SMSs)
within the district, they would be expected to organize and deliver a broader range of extension
and farmer training programs. In addition, these upgraded farm advisors would be expected to
formulate and target location-specific recommendations. Also, the SMS cadre at the district level
would be expanded and strengthened to support the primary production and farming systems by
supplying market related information to the producers. To facilitate the collaboration between
line departments and the district level, SMS positions would remain within each development
department, but their extension activities would be coordinated under the ATMA framework.
3. Management Reforms
Central Government Assistance to State Agriculture Universities for Expanded Role in Field
Extension.
On the pattern of the successful scientist-farmer-extensionist model developed by the Punjab
Agriculture University, the Directorates of Extension of SAUs would be supported to play a
larger role in providing extension services in their service-areas. Under the present arrangement,
the ownership and mainstreaming of KVKs with the state extension mechanisms has been weak.
KVKs, set up as Centres for location specific, adaptive research, if effectively organized to
achieve their primary objective of refinement and validation of local technologies could play a
strategic role in linking the research and extension systems particularly in the area of farming
systems based technologies. It is likely that State Governments will be more willing to own and
mainstream KVKs once their relevance as district level technology refinement institutions
integrated with the extension machinery is demonstrated rather than as just another vocational
training organization, which they are largely perceived as at present and of which there are
several others at the district level.
6. Empowerment of Farmers
CONCLUSIONS
Agricultural extension today is not what it used to be. It is passing through a major
transformation for various domestic and global reasons. The global movement for reforms in
extension has emerged because of dissatisfaction with the public agricultural extension systems.
These systems are full of flaws when judged against the latest trends in the world, and seem to be
terribly outdated. General impression about the public extension system is that it consumes
substantial government budget, yet is, neither too efficient nor too effective. The biggest donor,
who supported the public agricultural extension systems for almost two decades starting late
1970s, was the World Bank. One positive outcome of the Bank’s efforts was that the importance
of extension was recognized internationally. Although there was positive effect on yields, but
there was no sustainability of project interventions. Many developing countries were put under
burden of huge loans.
The disappointment with the extension methodology of Training and Visit (T & V) system was
expressed openly, and the Farmers Field Schools (FFS) was accepted as a better methodology
due to its participatory feature. By the late 1990s, both governments and donors had become
more frustrated with the public extension services. Measures like reduction in budget for
agriculture, reduction in or removal of farm subsidies, and downsizing of staff under structural
adjustment also affected extension. The worldwide developments that have prompted reforms in
extension organizations include: globalization and market liberalization, privatization, pluralism,
decentralization, client participation and focus, natural disasters and wars, information
technology revolution, rural poverty, food insecurity and HIV/AIDS epidemic, and integrated,
multi-disciplinary, holistic and sustainable development.
Lessons from the past can serve as a guide to the future in formulating relevant and useful
extension policy in developing countries. Finally, the ultimate test of extension policy is the
impact that extension is having on the productivity of all major groups of farmers, including their
incomes and quality of life. In addition, extension should be evaluated by its contribution to
sustainable agricultural development. Through their sheer numbers and outreach the public
extension system would continue to play a prominent role in technology dissemination. The large
section of small and marginal farmers and landless labourers would need to be serviced by the
public extension systems. The other actors involved in the extension/ transfer of technologies
such as NGOs, Farmers Organizations, Private Sector (both corporate & informal), para-workers
etc. would actively complement/ supplement the efforts of the public extension agency and
wherever possible replace it. Extension mechanisms will have to be driven by farmers' needs, be
location specific and address diversification demands. Technologies required to address total
farming systems are knowledge intensive. Public extension system will need to be redefined with
focus on knowledge-based technologies to upgrade and improve the skills of the farmers.
As agricultural extension transforms itself into a more diversified farming systems approach
from its present simplistic accent on yield enhancement by increasing some limited inputs,
farmers will be required to adopt a wider range of inputs and practices and develop skills in their
more efficient use. The task of extension will become more challenging in the wake of post
WTO era, which demands a system of market led extension with specific focus on
diversification, post-harvest management and export orientation. This will present a more
complex role, but simultaneously requiring a flexible approach allowing specific information to
be customized for different farmer-groups. A strategy of institutional innovations in extension
will be evolved which optimizes the strengths of the public-private sectors to service the needs of
the farming community.
REFERENCES
Coutts, J. (1994). Process, paper policy and practice: A case study of the introduction of a
formal extension policy in Queensland, Australia, 1987-1994. Den Haag: Koninklijke
Bibliotheek.
Department of Agriculture and Cooperation (2010). Ministry of Agriculture, Govt. of India–
Guidelines for Modified support to State Extension Programmes for Extension Reforms
scheme, 2010 (June, 2010). http://vistar.nic.in/projects/revised_ATMA_Guidelines.pdf,
accessed on 19.03.2011
Jones, G. (1986). Investing in rural extension: Strategies and goals. London: Elsevier
Applied Science Publishers.