LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Perspectives of Agricultural Extension in Nigeria

The term “Extension” is derived from a Latin word “Extendere” means “to

extend”. The Oxford English Dictionary of current English defined extension as:

“an additional part”, “addition or continuance” or enlargement. (Gombe et al.,

2016) defined extension education as an out of school voluntary adult education

program, using teaching and learning principles, concerning peoples’ livelihood,

carried out in systematic way in an atmosphere of mutual trust and respect. Also,

extension is defined as “the extending of or a service or system which extends the

educational advantages of an institution to persons’ unable to avail them in a

normal manner” (Izuogu & Chikerenma, 2015).

The concept of agricultural extension differs from one country to the other and

from one agricultural agency to another. For instance, in Australia and New

Zealand, it refers to as agricultural advisory work, while in USA it is a cooperative

extension service. Consequently, its definition depends on the objective of the

organization providing the services (Swanson, 2008). Agricultural extension as a

service or a system which assists farm people, through educational procedures, in

improving farming methods and techniques, increasing production efficiency and

income and bettering their levels of living and uplifting the social and educational

standards of rural life (Agbarevo, 2013).

Within the last four decades the conception and role of agricultural extension in

Nigeria has received its ideas from abroad. Some of these ideas were requested and

accepted in haste with the result that most of them have been improperly defined

and poorly understood by agricultural and rural development policy makers and

administrators. This scenario was brought about mainly by the unstable political

system in the country with each incoming government looking outside for a new

way to effectively handle the myriad of rural development problems. The result has

been the burgeoning of many different agricultural and rural development agencies

with a variety of approaches to the pertinent issues (Akinola et al., 2013).

However, research and extension in Nigeria has been widened in scope and

organizational involvement.

Government organised agricultural extension strategy include the National

Accelerated Food Production Project (NAFPP) which was introduced in 1972,

Agricultural Development Projects, ADP (1975), the Accelerated Development

Area Project, ADAP (1982), and Multi-State Agricultural Development Projects,

MSADP (1986). Other programmes were the Operation Feed the Nation

Programme, OFN (1976), the River Basin Development Authority, RBDA (1973),

the Green Revolution Programme, GRP (1980), the Directorate of Food, Roads
and Rural Infrastructure, DFRRI (1986), the National Directorate of Employment,

NDE (1986), the Nigeria Agricultural Insurance Scheme, NAIS (1987) and the

National Fadama Development Project, NFDP (1992). In recent years, the Poverty

Alleviation Programme, PAP (2000), and National Economic Empowerment and

Development Strategy, NEEDS (2004) were introduced. Specifically, the National

Special Programme for Food Security, NSPFS was launched in March 2003.

Some private agencies have embarked on agricultural extension services largely

towards a specific clientele system of their choice. Some of the agencies are: The

Nigerian Tobacco Company, oil companies such as Shell Petroleum Development

Company, and religious organizations such as the Catholic and the Anglican

churches. Some non-governmental organizations, NGO’s such as the Leventis

Foundation also operate some extension services.

2.2 Origin of Agricultural Extension System in Nigeria

The Nigeria National Agricultural extension system has evolved over four

centuries from a rudimentary, export crop-focused service to what can now be

described as a professional service even if its effectiveness and efficiency remain

just average at best. The evolutionary development of the Nigeria’s extension

service can be grouped into three major Eras Viz (Akinola et al., 2013):

i The colonial and immediate post-independence Era 1893-1968.

 ii The Oil Boom Era: 1970-1979.

iii The state-wide Agricultural development project (ADP) Era: 1980-present.

The main features of the extension strategies/approaches that characterized the

three phases are described briefly below:

1. The colonial and immediate post-independence Era: 1893-1968:

The extension strategies and approaches, which characterized this period included;          

 A. The colonial commodity extension approach: the early part of this era-1893-

1921 marked the beginning of scientific agricultural in Nigeria and the beginning

of direct government involvement in agricultural development (Izuogu &

Chikerenma, 2015). The agricultural policy of the colonial government was

primary focused on encouraging only export crops like cocoa, rubber, palm oil,

cotton and groundnut to support the agro-industries in Europe. The extension

strategy was clearly a commodity approach with some enforcement component.

Extension delivery even at this embryonic stage has the dual but conflicting roles

of education and law enforcement;

B. The Ministry of Agriculture approach: This started with the establishment of

the agricultural research stations in Samaru (1921), Umudike (1923), and Moor

plantation (1924) along with the Regional Ministries of Agriculture in the North,

East and West. The extension approach was diffused, non-focused, combining
advocacy and advisory roses with input and credit distribution, and regulatory

functions. A major feature of the approach was the compartmentalization of the

service into the various sectors-agriculture, forestry, fisheries, livestock etc, with

parallel extension services.

C. The revitalized Commodity Extension Strategy: (post-independence). Again,

the emphasis was on selected export crops-cocoa in the old West Region, oil palm

in the East, and groundnut in the North. There was an obvious neglect of the food

crops to the detriment of the nation.

D. The farm settlement/ from institute Leaver’s Extension Strategy (1959-

1965): This was a community development concept to entice young school leavers

to farming as a career and to serve as models for concentrated extension services.

Unfortunately, the scheme failed to achieves objectives because of exogenous

assumptions in design and mismanagement.

The strategies adopted during the Era failed largely because:

 planning was top-down with no involvement of the clientele

 Little or no linkage with research in all the approaches resulting in the

development of inappropriate technologies.

 Conflicting roles of extension –education and law enforcement.

  A flawed extension philosophy which saw the farmers as “traditional,

fatalistic, ignorant and resistant” to change.

2. “Oil Boom” Era; 1970-1979:

The near absence of a dynamic research and an effective extension strategy for

food crop production in the earlier era was worsened by the oil boom, which turned

out to be an “oil doom” for agriculture. The major extension approaches of the era

includes:

a) The National Accelerated Food Production Program: The (NAFPP) was a

well conceptualized strategy which incorporated research, extension and input

supply (through a network of agro-service centres) and farmers only minimally

involved in participatory technology development.

b) Operation Feed the Nation (OFN): This program was introduced in 1976 as a

strategy to substantially increase food production. Unfortunately, however, there

was nothing in the program that can be identified, as an articulated extension

strategy and thus, it died a natural death.

c) The River Basin Development Authority (RBDA) strategies: Although the

RBDAs were established in 1977 for the exploitation of water resources for

irrigation. Extension responsibilities were not assigned to them about 1984/85, to

provide extension services to farmers in their catchments area. They used the
diffused Ministry of Agriculture approach but because of their poor performance,

their extension responsibilities were removed;

d) The Green Revolution: This approach was premised on the Asia success story,

and was launched in 1979 to replace the OFN with the primary objective to

achieve food self-sufficiency for Nigeria in five years. Similar to the ministry

extension strategy, it also places emphasis on input supply, improvement of

infrastructure and provision of price incentives. The strategy/approach failed due to

lack of focus and diversification of efforts that could not be sustained.

e) The Pilot (Enclave) Agricultural Development Projects (ADPs): The ADP

extension system was based on the premise that a combination of essential factors

comprising of the right technology, effective extension, access to physical

production-enhancing inputs, adequate market and other infrastructure facilities are

essential to get agriculture moving (FACU, 1986). They started out as pilot

projects in Funtua, Gombe and Gusau in 1975. success led to establishment of the

enclave ADPs in six more states. All initially employed Training and Visit (T&V)

extension delivery approach. This strategy closed the oil boom era.

The myriad of approaches, which followed one another in quick successions, left

the rural populace probably more confused even though there were some
noticeable marginal increases in food production in the operational area of the

ADPs.

3. The state-wide ADP Era: 1984-Present:                       

This phase of the extension service was characterized by the rapid growth of the

ADP concept and reached national coverage by 1989 and had full responsibility for

extension delivery at the grassroots. Common to all were an autonomous project

management unit, on adaptive research component input delivery system, rural

infrastructure component for rural feeder roads and water supply and a  systematic

extension delivery using basically the Training and Visit Extension approach as

propounded by Benor and Baxter and Promoted by the world Bank in Nigeria and

other developing countries. Apart from the “one-size fits all concept” of the

strategy, it has proved to be very regimented, and expensive hence the serious

management problems after the withdrawal of the world Bank support to the

projects. It has never the less helped to professionalized extension delivery in the

country.

Although the strategy was crop-biased on introduction, this major defect was

corrected in 1989 with the introduction of the Unified Agricultural Extension

Services (UAES) which made provision for the inclusion to the other sectors, Viz;

livestock, fisheries, forestry, natural resource management etc thus, one village
extension agent (VEA) is expected to deliver extension messages in all agricultural

disciplines (sub-sectors) to the farmers. This was informed by the need to remove

the problems of conflicting messages to the clientele by multiple agents. It was

also expected to make the system move cost-effective by eliminating duplication of

efforts.

This extension strategy remains basically top-down in approach and the farmer

also still basically remains a passive receptor of information, which may not

necessarily meet his needs. His involvement and participation in technology

development remains low.

2.3 Aim and Objectives of Agricultural Extension

The objectives of extension can be expressions of the end towards which our

efforts are directed. Even if the fundamental objective of extension is the

development of the people, the specific objectives that have been developed over

time in the history of extension can be categorized as follows (Bello & Obinne,

2012):

i The dissemination of useful knowledge and information relating to

agriculture, including the use of improved technologies and improved

cultural practices in a variety of farming practices

 ii To improve all aspects rural people lives within the framework of the

national development policies and people’s need for development

Principles of Extension

Extension work has evolved basic working principles which are necessary for an

extension worker to follow in planning and practicing extension activities. These

principles are mentioned below (Mwangi, 1998).

i The extension work must be based on the needs and interests of the people.

ii Extension work should be based on the knowledge, skills, customs,

traditions, beliefs and values of the people.

iii Extension encourages people to take action and work out their own solutions

to their problem rather than receiving ready-made solutions.

iv An extension programme should be flexible so that necessary changes can

be made whenever needed to meet the varying conditions and need of the

people.

v Extension work should be based on the full utilization of local leadership.

vi Extension should be a co-operative action involving participatory activity in

which people co-operate to pursue a common cause.

 vii The success of extension education has to be measured by the level of

satisfaction of the people i.e. the extension beneficiaries.

viii Extension should be based on constant evaluation. The effectiveness

of the work is measured in terms of the changes brought in knowledge,

skills, and attitudes and the adoption of changed behaviour of the people,

and not merely in terms of achievement.

Operational Principles of Extension

Extension:

i Goals revolve around self-development of people through educational

resources

ii Enables the people to manage changes in the social and economic arena.

iii Programmes address people's needs and their priorities.

iv Uses a group approach to enhance cost-effectiveness, creativity and to

encourage democratic processes.

v Helps people become educators by encouraging them to participate in

development of the learning activities.

vi Is flexible and innovative in program approaches.

2.4 Classification/Categories of Extension Systems in Nigeria

2.4.1 University and Research Institutes Operated Extension

Some Universities in Nigeria undertake rural development activities in addition to

their teaching and research responsibilities. According to (Donye & Ani, 2014),

Typical examples are: the Badeku project of the University of Ibadan; the Okpuje

project for the University of Nigeria, Nsukka; the Isoya rural development project

of Obafemi Awolowo University and the Zaria aided rural change project for

Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria; these projects are initiated to improve socio-

economic conditions in selected Villages with manageably small populations

(Ahmed Awad Talb Altalb, Tadeusz Filipek, 1998).

In addition to the extension outfits of the conventional Universities, the agricultural

Universities in Umudike, Abeokuta, and Makurdi also engage in extension

activities in nearby areas. The University of Agriculture at Makurdi has a

cooperative farmer in selected villages. The University of Agriculture at Abeokuta

has a formidable Agricultural media resources and Extension Center. The

extension outreach of Micheal Okpara University of Agriculture at Umudike was

implemented by the College of Agricultural Economics, Rural Sociology and

Extension. The agricultural Research Council of Nigeria (ARCN), a supervisory

body to the 18 Agricultural Research Institutes (NARIs), has reintroduced the

adopted village concept in all the NARIs. It is now mandatory for each institute to

operate at least one adopted village (Ibrahim et al., 2014).

2.4.2 Ministry of Agriculture Operated Extension

This dates back to 1893 when a Department of Botanical Research was established

at Olokomeji in the present day Ogun state. Later the headquarters of the

department of agriculture for the Southern and the Northern Nigeria were

established in 1910 and 1912 respectively. Today, there are 37 Ministries of

Agriculture (one in each state) and the FCT (Abuja). These were charged with the

responsibility of agricultural extension service. In doing this, each Ministry

received financial and technical support from the Federal Ministry of Agriculture

(Kagbu & Issa, 2017).

Some specific functions of the Ministries of Agriculture include: training of

personnel, training of professional staff; training of technical staff and farmers in

the production, distribution, processing and marketing of agricultural products,

supply of agricultural inputs to farmers; assisting in social development and home

– making and youth development (Izuogu & Chikerenma, 2015).

2.4.3 Commodity/Sectoral Agency Extension

This was aimed at raising the production of a single crop as rapidly as possible,

thus commodity Boards were established in strategic areas of the country where

production of the commodity was a major occupation, with favorable agro climatic

conditions. The commodity Board was semi-autonomous and employed their own

staff as well as supplied inputs to farmers at subsidized rates. The clientele of each
Board was the farmer growing the specific crop, hence the Cocoa Board,

Groundnut Board few to mentioned (Swanson, 2008).

2.4.4 Extension Work by Registered NGOs

Some registered NGOs employed extension workers to carry out extension work

and communication development for their target system. Some of such NGOs are

assisted by the government financially. However, they source their funds from

national and international bodies (Janosik, 2005). While, majority of the

international NGOs involved in extension delivery are Christian Based

International Organization such as ECWA, CRUDAN, and COCIN. The only

international NGOs known solely for its extension activities in Nigeria is Sasakawa

Global 2000 (Saliu et al., 2009).

2.4.5 Farmers Organizations Involved in Providing Advisory Services

There are different types of farmers based organization operating in Nigeria. They

include farmer cooperatives, farmer and commodity associations, and farmer

groups. As part of the cooperative structure in the country, there are Ministries

commerce and cooperative in all states. However, the performance of cooperatives,

especially farmers’ cooperative has been questioned (Agbarevo, 2013).

As a result of the unsatisfactory performance of farmers’ cooperative and the call

by government for private sector to participate in development activities, several

farmers’ association sprang up in the nineties. Such as commodity base and

registered commodity producer association while others remains general in nature

such as: All Farmer Association of Nigeria (AFAN),

Federation of Farmer Association of Nigeria (FOFAN), Farmer Association of

Nigeria (FAN) etc, most of these associations seeks to represent the interest of

their members. As such provision of advisory service, a grass root activity, is not

an important part of their contribution (Saliu et al., 2009).

The farmers associations are not directly involved in providing extension services

to their members. However, they are indirectly engaged through farmer facilitators

in providing technical advice to their members. In addition to this initiative a

number of projects in Nigeria are using the group participatory approach. They

include National Fadama Programs, CommunityBased Agricultural and Rural

Development

Project (CBARDP), National Special Program on Food Security (NSPFS), Local

Empowerment and Environmental Management Project (LEEMP) just few to

mentioned (Swanson, 2008).

2.5 Current Challenges of Agricultural Extension in Nigeria

Private participation or outright privatized extension has been the subject of

widespread discussion by those considering the challenges of providing an

efficient agricultural extension system for farmers in developing coutries (Gombe

et al., 2016).

According to (Davis, 2008), Africa’s development score card and by implication

Nigeria is disturbing. It is characterized by:

 Rising poverty

 Almost 40% of the population lives below the poverty line

 Deepening environmental degradation

 Poor region of the world

 The only region in the world where poverty is projected to rise this century

 Poor information and communication technology linkage

Nigeria remains grouped among the 43 “Low income food-deficit countries”

(LIFDCs) in Africa. The National Agricultural Extension Research and Liaison

Service (NAERLS) have the challenges not only to meet the nation’s needs for

sustainable agricultural development and food security but indeed to meet the set

millennium goal (Anaeto et al., 2015).

2.6 Impediments to Improved Public/Private Collaborations

Public/private partnership (PPP) is the policy vogue in Nigeria, not only in

agricultural and rural development projects but in other sectors as well (Saliu et al.,

2009). However, it is worthy to note that the PPP concept itself is new to

government and the impediment currently hindering the attainment of agricultural

policy objectives, if not properly addressed may likely impair the smooth running

of the partnership or weaken it. Some of the impediments are:

2.6.1 Policy Impediment

Little attention has been given to policy instruments and variable such as

developmental needs of the people, target beneficiaries, budgetary constraints,

employment opportunities, population growth rates, environmental sustainability

and other socio-economic needs of the people (Donye & Ani, 2014). The most

difficult and challenging policy issue facing the agricultural extension service

today is how to secure a stable source of funding (Waithaka, 2001). According to

them, since the 1980‘s funding of agro-technology generation and transfer became

an increasingly important policy issue. They contended that this is because of

progressive decline in financial support for extension.

Despite the resuscitation of extension in the global agenda and the adoption of the

public-private-partnership (PPP) strategy by the present government in Nigeria, the

agricultural policy in general and extension policy in particular is still

characterized by improvisation and ad-holism. Development planners have

indicted policy makers for the lack of sustainability, continuity, realism and

consistency. Successive governments have come up with new agricultural policies

and programs which were different from their predecessors (Anaeto et al., 2015).

Some of the projects/programs implemented over the years include, cooperatives

1935 to date, commodity boards 1945-1985, agricultural research institutes 1964 to

date, ADPs 1975 to date, NACRDB 1973 to date, OFN 1979- 1983, presidential

initiatives on cocoa, cassava, rice, livestock, fisheries and vegetable oil 1999-2007

(Janosik, 2005).

2.6.2 Strategic Impediment

Providing agricultural extension services to small holder farmers on a sustainable

basis requires a well-articulated vision and implementation strategy. The vision

will provide framework for a long-term strategic plan to guide the development of

sub-component and the involvement of all stakeholders. The vision 2010 provides

for that need but the implementation strategies have not been fully articulated

(Bello & Obinne, 2012).

2.6.3 Structural Impediment

Structural and institutional stability are required for an enhanced and sustainable

provision of advisory services. Stability allows for long term strategic planning and

commitment of resources on a long-term basis. Frequent organizational changes

within extension directly impact the organization’s effectiveness as well as the

collaboration among the various advisory service providers. The Federal Ministry

of Agriculture has undergone structural changes three times in the last few years.

Currently, it has just been changed from Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Water

Resources (FMA & WR) to Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Rural

Development (FMA & RD). If the public-private-partnership is to work well in

Nigeria a favorable conducive atmosphere for long term commitment of resources

by the private sector must be created.

This is done through long term policy instrument and government commitment to

those plans (Agbarevo, 2013). Agricultural extension is crucial to development in

the Agricultural sector and overall national development (Janosik, 2005).

According to (Anaeto et al., 2015), there is need to legislate Agricultural extension

policy so that it will be well organized, financially stable for effectiveness and

sustained impart.

2.6.4 Financial Impediments

The most difficult and challenging policy issue facing the agricultural extension

service today is how to secure a stable source of funding (Omonijo et al., 2014).

For instance, in the early days of the present democratic government 1999-2015,

while the National budget has increased by more than 160 percent, the share of

agriculture was instead reduced by fifty percent. The commitment by government

to fund agricultural Extension service delivery in Nigeria has been a serious

impediment to the extension delivery in Nigeria. One of the factors that

necessitated the withdrawal of the Word Bank from funding the ADPs has been

attributed to lack of commitment by government to pay their counterpart fund

required for the execution of the project (Gombe et al., 2016).

Agricultural practices must change in tropical Africa in order to achieve the

millennium development goals in agriculture. According to him these countries

can no longer rely completely on traditional systems that result in poverty and

hunger. He maintained that new technologies still lie in Universities and crop

improvement centres that require more effective and practical extension services in

order to deliver to the growers (Saliu et al., 2009).

More so, the ineffectiveness and inefficiencies, which characterize the public

extension service, have given rise to the wide-call for a private sector-driven

extension services (Swanson, 2008). Therefore, the need to strengthen the existing

extension delivery service in the country to make it more effective and efficient to
achieve this onerous task, agricultural extension deserves to be appropriately

funded by government as well as all other stakeholders in agriculture in Nigeria

(Saliu et al., 2009).

2.7 Redefining the Nigerian Agricultural Extension System for Effective

Agricultural Transformation

In reaction to the worrisome performance of the agricultural sector, the Federal

Government has embarked on various strategies aimed at returning the sector to its

enviable position in the Nigerian economy (Kagbu & Issa, 2017). These

Governments’ efforts have not yielded sufficient desired results, as the country still

witnessed increasing high cost of food, general cost of living and perpetual

poverty. This calls for redefining of the Nigerian agricultural extension system by

the government and extension to focus on better performance of agriculture in

Nigeria. One of such recent strategies is the agricultural transformation agenda.

The Nigerian agricultural extension system must therefore be redefined for

effective agricultural transformation (Haruna & Abdullahi, 2014). This would be

achieved through decentralization, pluralism, cost sharing, and cost recovery,

participation of stakeholders in development initiatives and the decisions and

resources that affect them. The following recommendation will align agricultural

extension in Nigeria for effective agricultural transformation agenda:

i Public financing should be focused on the poor especially on the rural

dwellers.

ii Extension should be viewed as not just a service system but of knowledge

and information support function for rural people.

iii There should be capacity building and institutional strengthening for

qualified service providers and ensure strong links with and modernization

of the various components of the formal and non-formal agricultural

education system.

iv Although total privatization is not feasible, even for commercial agriculture,

the private sector should play an increasingly important role in rural

knowledge systems

v Extension strategy should be executed on long-term resolution and must be

taken within a widely shared vision at different levels.

vi Government should redefine extension policy for a pluralistic system.

References

Agbarevo, A. (2013). Farmers’ Perception of Effectiveness of Agricultural

Extension Delivery in Cross-River State, Nigeria. IOSR Journal of Agriculture

and Veterinary Science, 2(6), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.9790/2380-0260107

Ahmed Awad Talb Altalb, Tadeusz Filipek, P. S. (1998). The role of extension in

the transfer and adoption of agricultural technology. Journal of International

Agricultural and Extension Education, 03(05), 63–68.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2

Akinola, M., Issa, F., & Sanni, S. (2013). Agricultural Extension Systems in West

Africa: Adoptable Strategies for Nigeria’s Agricultural Extension Reform

Agenda. Journal of Agricultural Extension, 15(2).

https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v15i2.1

Anaeto, F. C., Asiabaka, C. C., & Ani, A. O. (2015). Up-scaling and re-branding
 agricultural extension service in Nigeria : Policy issues , options and

challenges. 3, 10–17.

Bello, M., & Obinne, C. P. O. (2012). Problems and Prospects of Agricultural

Information Sources Utilization by Small Scale Farmers: A Case from

Nasarawa State of Nigeria. Journal of Communication, 3(2), 91–98.

https://doi.org/10.1080/0976691x.2012.11884799

Davis, K. E. (2008). Extension in sub-saharan Africa: Overview and assessment of

past and current models, and future prospects. Journal of International

Agricultural and Extension Education, 15(3), 15–28.

Donye, A. O., & Ani, A. O. (2014). AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL AND

MANAGEMENT SCIENCES Policy issues on agricultural extension practices

and the transformation of adult-farmer education in Nigeria Department of

Agricultural Economics and Extension , Adamawa State University , Mubi ,.

American Journal of Social Sciences, 5(1), 11–18.

https://doi.org/10.5251/ajsms.2014.5.1.11.18

Gombe, S. Y., Suandi, T. Bin, Arif, I., & Zohara Omar, I. (2016). Extension

Education’s Role towards Community Empowerment in Nigeria: Issues,

Challenges and Prospects. Journal of Education & Social Policy, 3(2), 135–

142. www.jespnet.com
Haruna, S., & Abdullahi, Y. (2014). Training of Public Extension Agents in

Nigeria and the Implications for Government’s Agricultural Transformation

Agenda. Journal of Agricultural Extension, 17(2), 98.

https://doi.org/10.4314/jae.v17i2.13

Ibrahim, H., Zhou, J., Li, M., & Chen, Q. (2014). Perception of Farmers on

Extension Services in North Western Part of Nigeria: The Case of Farming

Households in Kano State. Journal of Service Science and Management,

07(02), 57–62. https://doi.org/10.4236/jssm.2014.72006

Izuogu, C. U., & Chikerenma, A. (2015). Redefining the Nigerian agricultural

extension system for effective agricultural transformation. Developing

Country Studies, 5(11), 11–15. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=lah&AN=20153243364&site=ehost-live

%5Cnhttp://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/DCS/article/view/23087/23606

Janosik, S. M. (2005). 済無 No Title No Title. NASPA Journal, 42(4), 1.

https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

Kagbu, J. H., & Issa, F. O. (2017). Challenges of Extension Delivery in Improving

Agricultural Productivity in Nigerian Rural Economy : Critical Issues. 18(3).

Mwangi, J. (1998). the Role of Extension in the Transfer and Adoption of

Agricultural Technologies. Journal of International Agricultural and

 Extension Education, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.5191/jiaee.1998.05108

Omonijo, D., Toluwase, S., Oludayo, O., & Uche, O. (2014). Impacts of

Agricultural Development Programme (ADP) on Rural Dwellers in Nigeria: A

Study of Isan-Ekiti. International Research Journal of Finance and

Economics, 128(128), 41–55.

Saliu, J. O., Obinne, P. C., & Audu, S. I. (2009). Trends in agricultural extension

services in Africa: Option for new approaches. Journal of Agricultural

Extension and Rural Development, 1(3), 071–076.

Swanson, B. E. (2008). Global Review of Good Agricultural Extension and

Advisory Practices. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations,

82345.

Waithaka, M. (2001). Agricultural extension and rural development: breaking out

of traditions. In Agricultural Systems (Vol. 68, Issue 2).

https://doi.org/10.1016/s0308-521x(01)00005-1