Tài liệu khuyên nông tiếng anh giúp các bạn học tiếng anh chuyên ngành

Based on a given theoretical framework, feed back from sub-group participants both VNGO’s and INGOs field experience can be used and shared with DARD, MARD, and DAFE in order for INGO’s

Agricultural Extension Services for the Poor

Foreword

This review of Agricultural Extension Services for the Poor has been written on the

initiative of the sub-group on Agricultural Extension Services for the Poor The sub-group

is part of the Sustainable Agriculture and Natural Resource Management Group of the VUFO – NGO Resource Centre

This documentation review is part of the INGO’s efforts to respond to and contribute to the poverty reduction efforts of Vietnam expressed in the Comprehensive Poverty

Reduction & Growth Strategy (CPRGS) This review is carried out to support these poverty reduction efforts of the Vietnamese government by focusing on feed back from field experience in agricultural extension, related to the actual policy context in Vietnam

In this review the INGO’s use their experiences in pro-poor agricultural extension in Vietnam The relationship between farmers and NGO’s actively involved in extension service is generally understood to be of a different nature than that between farmers and government extension services With the contribution of this reveiw, we can look at agricultural extension services from a different perspective and to bring this perspective into a debate on policies as well as implementation practices for more pro-poor agricultural extension

Based on a given theoretical framework, feed back from sub-group participants (both VNGO’s and INGOs) field experience can be used and shared with DARD, MARD, and DAFE in order for INGO’s to contribute to a dialogue on how to further improve

agricultural extension policies and implementation practices to be more pro-poor and ensuring the access of poor men and women, ethnic minorities and marginalized

communities to appropriate agriculture extension systems

With poor we mean the more vulnerable rural people who depend on natural resources

We pay particular attention to women, ethnic minorities, landless, people living in remote places or in places vulnerable to natural disasters, or small-holders who largely depend

on (falling) export crop prices

I would like to express my appreciation to the sub-group participants and contributing organizations who made the documentation review and the publication of it possible

David Payne

Co-director

VUFO – NGO Resource Centre

Contents

Foreword 1

4

Agricultural extension and poverty reduction 5

18

23

.27 33

nnex 1 Terms of reference of the AE sub-group 40

s of Reference for Documentation Review 46

Abbreviations and Acronyms 3

1 Introduction

1.1 Background 4

1.2 Objectives 4

2 2.1 Overview of current government’s agricultural extension 5

2.2 Government’s Commitment on Pro-poor Extension 11

2.3 Overview of understanding and practices among NGOs and Externally supported projects on pro-poor extension 14

3 The gaps between current Government's extension policies/practices and the pro-poor extension

3.1 Targeting 18

3.2 Technical training 21

3.3 Input supply and product promotion

3.4 Supporting farmers' organizations 25

3.5 Extension socialization

3.6 Market access and market information 29

4 Recommendations 33

4.1 Key issues for which NGO field experiences should be collected and documented

4.2 Relevant strategies and opportunities for policy dialogues on pro-poor extension 35

Key References 39 A

Annex 2 Term

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Asia Development Bank ASDP Agriculture Sector Development Program

Program 135 Government’s Program on socio-economic development of the extremely

difficult communes (according to PM’s Decision No.135/1998/QD-TTg dated

31 July 1998) Program 661 Government's Program on planting 5 million ha of forest (according to Prime

Minister's Decision No.661/QD-TTg dated 29 July 1998) PTD Participatory Technology Development

SANRM Sustainable Agricultural and Natural Resources Management

TAGE Thematic Ad-hoc Group on pro-poor Extension

TOT Train(ing) - of – Trainer

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

VDR Vietnam Development Report

1 USD = 15 500 VND or dong (as of October 2003)

ADB

ircular 56 Used as shorthand for MARD's Circular 56/2003/TT-BNN dated 9 April 2003

on the design of pro-poor agriculture projects within HEPR program PRGS Comprehensive Poverty Reduction and Growth Strategy

DAFE Department for Agricultural and Forestry Extension

ARD Department for Agriculture and Rural Development

ecree 13 Used as shorthand for Government's Decree 13/CP dated 2 March 1993 on

Extension Decree 20 Used as shorthand for Government’s Decree 20/1998/ND-CP dated 31 Marc

1998 on Developing Trade in Mountainous and Ethnic Minorities Areas ecree 86 Used as shorthand for Government’s Decree 86/2003/ND-CP dated 18 July

2003 on the functions, tasks and organization of MARD

CO Economic community organization

FDG Focus Group Discussion

FFS Farmers' Field School

EPR Hunger Eradication and Poverty Reduction

YV High Yield Varieties

PM Integrated Pest Management

SG International Support Group (at MARD)

MDG Like-Minded Donor Group

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

MARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development

OFI Ministry of Finance

OLISA Ministry of Labor, Invalid and Social Affairs

PI Ministry of Planning and Investment

AEC National Agricultural Extension Center

PPA Participatory Poverty Assessment

PRA Participatory Rural Appraisal

Agricultural Extension Services for the Poor

women, Kinh and

reasons the system can not meet the needs of farmers, especially the poor, women and ethnic farmers In order to help addressing this problem, MARD has reviewed the agriculture extension system to t Some donors like Asian Development Bank (ADB) also have fund to restructure the system In order to support

agriculture extens rking group decided to formulate a sub-group

practices to poli

1.2 Objective

This paper1 is to:

national a

thtedethnic peo

arizs/prRecomme

portunit

a more

reference of the s be found in annexes 1 and 2

Introd ion

lthough has achieved significant economic developmen

ince doi m verty in Vietnam remains high Today, poverty is concentrated in rura

bt that off-farm employment plays a very important role in poverty

er, farming activities in agriculture, forestry and fishery will still be theain liveliho

ome The

rategies of the poor in remote and ethnic minority areas in the years t

g years may be characterized by increasing inequality, too Amon

alanced access to theerminant of inequality is the unb

ural extension services - betwe ethnic minorities

he exte stem has been set up since 1993 in all

make it more efficien

he go nd MARD to produce a more pro-p

ion system, SANRM wo

o wor culture extension which

cy dialogues To guide this process, a documentation review on

• Summ

policie

e the key points on the gaps between the current agricultural extensionactices and the pro-poor agricultural extension

ntation, strategies and

• nd the key issues for further docume

ies for communication with policy maop

tension coordinated by NAEC,

s within MARD (e.g PPD), whe

on efforts of other ministries (e.g Fub-group and this study can

SANRM sub-group have made this work possible with the time, expertise and financial arrangements

review is written by Mr Hoang Xuan Thanh from Ageless Consult

National Agriculture Extension Center (NAEC), MARD Core me

2 Agri

.1 Overview of current government’s agricultural extension

anization and staffing

of the government's agriculture extension services have been Decree 13) as:

olely responsible for agricultural extension services

n stations with a total number of approximately 2,000 permanent extension staff Each district station has 3-5 staff

es in planting and animal husbandry In some provinces the

extension stations at commune clusters ('cum xa') are set up

and village levels: Agricultural extension network at commune and

s unds, managed to set up their teams of commune

an ignificantly among the provinces - monthly stipend can range from

ays a big concern

, clubs) are , contributing to

cultural extension and poverty reduction

2

2.1.1 Functions, org

The general functions

efined since 1993 (by

(iii) providing market information for farmers

Formally, the government's agriculture extension system has three levels: national, provincial, and district

• National level: By new Decree 86, the National Agricultural Extension Center

(NAEC) under the MARD is s

This is an attempt to separate the 'state administration' from the 'public services'

in agriculture extension2 Currently, the NAEC has 25 professional staff with different background The detailed functions and tasks of the NAEC are being revised.3

• Provincial level: There are provincial agricultural extension centers under the

DARDs in all 61 provinces and cities over the country On average, each

provincial extension center now has around 15-20 staff (70% of provincial

extension staff have university degrees)

• District level: Around 420 districts out of the total 600 over the country have

established their agro-forestry extensio

90,000 dong (Lao Cai) up to 300-400,000 dong (Ha Giang, Tuyen Quang)

Limited capacity of the grass root extension workers is alw

In addition, many voluntary agricultural extension associations (groups

established at commune and village levels by individuals and communities Somemass organizations are also involving in extension activities, thus

the increasing socialization of this work

2 The National Agriculture Extension Centre (NAEC) was established on 26 April 2002 However at that time the Center was under the Department of agriculture and forestry extension By the new Decree 86, the NAEC now becomes a separate entity directly under the Minister (and the former Department of agricultural

of

and forestry extension is replaced by the new Department of agriculture)

3 By the Government's Decree 43 dated 2 May 2003 on "functions, duties, organization of the Ministry

Fishery", for the first time a National Fishery Extension Center is established under the Ministry

Figure 2.1: The vertical relations in agricultural

• Development and management of national agri extension programmes

• Determination of economic and technical

• Organization and management of

transfer of advanced techniques and market information to farmers

• Training of agri extension worker

• Agri extension literature preparation

2.1.2 Planning and budgeting

A typical up-and-down planning and budgeting can be observed in the extension system.National-level extension programs using state budget are proposed by NAEC to MAR

Department for Agriculture and Rural Development

Centers for Agricultural and Forestry Extension

• Development and guidance of provincial agri extension programmes

extension programmes in the province

• Advanced techniques transfer to farmers

n

al agri nsion programmes

• Guidance for organizations, incl private organizations, on implementation of agri

• Provide market information to farmers

• Provincial agri extension policy making

• Construction of demonstration models (i collaboration with Dept for Agri and Forestry Extension) under nation extension programmes

• Monitoring and assessment of exte

Division for Agriculture & Rural Development

Agricultural & Forestry Extension Stations

• Direct transfer of techniques to farmers

n ion workers

od farmers'" clubs or interest

• Training of grassroots extens

• Build the "go groups

• Collaboration and reports to upper lev

on district-level extension activities Contracted agri extension

workers/collaborators or communal agricultural officers working as agri

extension workers • Not mandatory

• Responsibilities defined in contracts

• Some provinces have develope provincial policies on the task and functions of commune extension w

d their orkers and the role of grassroots organizations Farmers associations

(groups, clubs)

for approval This program/budget is then allocat

Similarly, the provincial

extension centers develop thubmit to the provincial People's Committee (throug oval, and then

to distr tations for implem ntation At the moment, there is

ystem

Table 2.1 - Allocated central budget for national-level extension programs

Alloc

to provincial extensieir own annual extension plans,

h DARD) for apprs

allocate funds ict extension s

extension budget

(in billion dong)

Agricultural extension budget (in billion dong)

Forestry extension budget (in billion dong)

Source: Agriculture and Forestry Extension Agency, MARD

addition to the allocated central budget,

e provinces also allocate their own

udgets to agro-forestry extension

inly fo costs plus

cally allocated bu mong the

rovinces, from several hun

ong to around 1 billion don

nsion centers also ceive some small extension budget from

nnual HEPR program (with some overlap

ith provincial budget), and from other

grams and projects that

he planning a

xtension largel

orms' as regulated b tions of the MO

istrict extension worker traveling more than 15 days a o

um subsistence & travel costs of no more than 100,000 d $

er month), without a how far he/she ha

e mountain s and villages for planning and

y of cost norms in many cases may prevent the xtension workers from going far to the remote commune and villages or using a articipatory approach in extension activities

extension services at different levels are llowed to utilize other funding strategies outside state financing (i.e grants from

T nd use of state budget in

y depend on the fixed 'cost

y various regula

e

n

d

Fi and MARD4 For example, a

m nth can only receive a ong per month (equals to 6

lump-s to travel 'within' the dilump-strict

M&E, then come

s

ous commune(i.e go to th

ack in the same day) The rigidit

4 For example, Circular 2698 dated 1994 of MOFI on expenditures for extension activities; Circular

93/1998/TT-BTC dated 30 June 1998 of MOFI on cost norms for workshops; Circular 94/1998/TT-BTC dated

30 June 1998 of MOFI on cost norms for domestic travels; Decision 62/1999-QDD-BNN-KNKL dated 7 April

1999 of MARD on temporary cost norms for technical materials in extension programs of cattle

Figure 2.

for provincial extension centers (Tra Vinh,

Lao Cai)

from Provin budg 60%

from HEPR program 10%

from Central budget

cial et

30%

Source: OGB (2002)

2 – Examples of budget sources

2.1.3 Current Extension Approaches

extension programs which are very similar to the national agricultural extension

recommendations is considere n for program success evaluation Crop productivity index is also another criterion for prog monitoring

farmers' livelihoods Therefore introduction of techniques is frequently attached with

arrarmples are HEPR program, Program 135, uch programs was organized in projects run the management of various concerned rules of these programmes are made within eave little room for flexibility

ement of harmful insects and diseases to

n of Vegetation and Veterinary Services) rotection and Veterinary Service systems models and providing communal and village how to mitigate r farmers is tension system

well as other kinds of materials However,

on workers in recommending the farmers which products should be used, especially when they act as

farmers, often through the national agricultural extension programs (alternativ

d oriented agricultural extension approach) The NAEC under MARD supervises

rograms throu

or flexibility

n of new varieties on large homogeneous land area

on of demoplementation or budgeting The approach isctio

ous cultivation

ds and recommendations Farmer’s

d one of criterio

ram

rm implies that a technique is only one of influencing

support in terms of material supply, loan

programs on promoting agriculture and pove

employ this form of agricultural extension Exa

Program 661 and Decree 20 Operation of s

by provincial People's Committee under

department of MARD However the financing

the set guidelines of using state budget, and l

c Risk mitigation

Risk mitigation in agriculture covers manag

livestock (stipulated in the Law for Protectio

This function is often fulfilled by the Plant P

ypical activities are training on IPM

ngement or infrastructure Government

ty reduction at provincial levels normally

T

veterinary services However the concern of

still hardly addressed by the government's ex

d Commercial services promotion

Commercial services promotion for production materials has been done partly by the MARD and partly by corporations This form of agricultural extension claims that higher consumption of input materials leads to improved productivity and greater development

of agriculture Farmers are seen as customers, who are provided with recommendations

on such materials as new seeds, fertilizers as

risks for the poo

farmers should pay for the materials at agreed prices The Government agricultural extension mechanism acts as a link in the promotion process and hardly acts as material distributor However in many cases there is bias among extensi

agents for the commercial companies

e Agriculture commodity promotion

hich the farmers commit to sell agricultural roducts to the companies and in turn the farmers can receive a number of supports in

or credit This form of promotion is popular in areas that roduce raw materials subject to processing for exports (e.g tea, coffee, fruits or high

his is a 'contract farming' promotion in w

24 June 2002 on promoting the contract farming in agriculture)

Table 2.2 - Summary of agricultural extension approaches

Approach

Topics

1 Technology promotion

2 Socio-Economic development

3 Risk mitigation 4 Comm

services promotio

ercial

n

5 Agricultural commodity promotion Organization,

program, key

project

Government's agricultural extension system, research institutes

Programme135, resettlement program, HEPR program

IPM, veterinary services, Plant protection mechanism

Agriculturmaterial c(Fertilizerpesticide

c

r,

al ompanies ,

s, seeds)

Agricultural produprocessing corporations and companies (sugacoffee, tea, etc.)

t

Key Policies Decree 13 Program 135, 661, HEPR,

Decree 20

Decree 07,08 L/CTN

Risk control Business profit Export promotion

Finance Govt budget;

provincial and district budgets

Government budget Donors; WB / ADB loans

Government budget Donors; WB / ADB loans

Business profit Business profit

Targets for

promotion

Farmers who are capable of constructing demonstration models

Small-scale demonstrations, poor farmers in mountainous areas

All farmers Farmers

buy agricmaterials

who can ultural

Farmers who possess land

Promotion

content

Advanced technology available from

researchers

Extension of proven successful experience

Techniques for risk mitigation

Guidancematerials su

by the comp

or

on use of pplied anies

New technology fexport promotion

Promotion

methods

Demonstration Demonstration, training,

inputs (seeds, fertilizer)

Site training Site training,

literature

Training, inputs, credit

2.2 Govern nt’s Commitment on Pro-poor Extension

For its continued commitment for pove reduction, until re Government has

2.2.1 Pro-poor Extension in HEPR program and Program 135

HEPR program in the period of 2001-2005 (Decision 143/ /QD-TTg dated 27 Sep

2001 of the Prime M SA’s proposal for pro-poor extension in the 5-year period is as follows :

duction planning, expenditure management in the family

ganizations as W n's Union, Farmers'

ing the poor in production

ve to ‘concretize

it th annual HEPR plans In

’s pro-poor extension projects vary a lot basing ntext, leadership

availability of the respective provinces

MARD's m gemen HEPR agricultural proje

o xtension project a ssig the "Department for Settlement and Fixed

on Department This is rather when government's pro-poor extension is cons roject

2.2.2 Pro-poor Extension in CPRGS

objectives i the Vietnam Development Target the Millennium

pro-poor extension, namely (SRV.2002):

• Focus ltural e sion expenditures on disadvantaged areas to ensure that

ups can benefit from ext sion vice much as others

me

tension for the poor

rty pro

eport their actcreasing

inister) MOLI

5

provide training for improvement of production ca

managemen

develop the network of commune e

develop the models of plants, animals with new seeds, new techniques

•

•

•

•

The provincial authoritie

poor extension project

Govern

commitment and budget

At national level, the

pro-p

Cultivation and New Economic Zones", not to the Extensi

problematic

and is set o

Decree 86 this separati

Cultivation and New Economic Zones no longer

The Program 135 (and Program 661) also

government's pro-poor e

poor areas (by Decree

for the poor

organize extension training courses f

guide in pro

coordinate closely with such mass or

Union, Youth Union, Veteran Association in guid

cts - including the

separate phat with the new ttlement and Fixed

with a Gover

lity

d a numb

Ma Goals (MDG

y 2002,), th

view to accomplish the poverty red

s (VDT) as localiment issu

estimated as of 100 billion dong, i.e in average 20 billion dong per year

OLISA’s proposal, the budg the pro-poor e n projects in 2001-20 5 HERP program is

• Provide to the poor on regular basis market information on the a

varieties, guidance on production techniques, introduction of successful bpplication of new usiness

local people and those who know the languages of ethnic minorities

the low-cost but

onors and INGOs are supporting the Government to ‘roll-out’ the CPRGS at both

shed to provide a forum for stakeholder participation in the preparation of extension programs Council

to NGOs, universities, farmers’ organizations, private companies, input suppliers, and agribusinesses

ational budget for agricultural extension

to provide an adequate recurrent and

s where there are large numbers of poor farmers;

participatory extension methodology, marketing, post harvest activities, and rural finance;

models and new effective ways to conduct business

• Focus on training cadre to provide extension and advisory services to women,

• Support research to develop appropriate technologies, especially

highly efficient ones that are needed by the poor; raise the quality

extension services to farmers

• Encourage the sharing of production experiences between researchers,

managers, technicians and farmers to improve the productivity of crops and

animals

• Build and disse

areas, to help hungry and poor households overcome their difficulties and

their capacity to gradually change their productio

poverty and integrate with the wider community

• Encourage the development of and provide support to a variety of vo

joint and self-managed forms of extension services in every comm

enable people to share experience in cultivating and animal breeding in order to increase income and reduce poverty

ove directions need to be realized in more concrete regulations and plans

d

national and provincial levels (on a pilot basis) Hopefully some core CPRGS’s planning principles – i.e pro-poor, participatory, evidence-based – will be step-by-step introduced

in the field of agricultural extension

2.2.3 Extension in ADB’s “agricultural sector development program”

In April 2003, the Government signed a USD 60-million "agriculture sector development program (ASDP)" with ADB Under a detailed roadmap of three tranches, the Government undertakes to substantially restructure the research and extension system During the period of 2003-2006 the key commitments under ASDP are (ADB.2002):

• Provincial extension advisory councils will be establi

representation will include farmers' and growers' associations, mass

organizations, cooperatives, local research institutes, extension staff, banks,

NGOs, private sector input suppliers, and staff from departments of agriculture, planning, land, finance, science and technology, and trade

• Some extension services will be contracted out

• the Government will increase the n

at the rate of at least 12% per year

operating budget to agricultural extension

• MARD and representatives of all the provincial governments will approve a joint plan for extension work that

(i) develops extension strategies and priorities that focus extension efforts in remote and upland area

(ii) strengthens linkages between research and extension;

(iii) redirects training of extension staff toward a new set of skills including

(iv) institutionalizes the participatory approach in extension services in

which farmers will increasingly participate in planning, implementing, monitoring, and evaluating of extension activities;

tension services to the poor, women, and ethnic

(vi) increases funding to train extension staff and farmers; and

(vii) improves delivery of ex

groups by increasing the number of female and ethnic minority staleast 10% in each category over a period of 36 months

ad ition, many other projects of the donors also try to advocate for a pro-po

on in certain ways For example, the WB's Northern Mountain Poverty Reduction mme is using some "village/commune development plan" approaches (as onalized in Son La) as the entry point for the participatory planning and bud

in the whole cycle (identification/prioritization,

including extension activities

• Empowerment: the Cooperative Law, the Decree on Association (Decree

88/2003/ND-CP dated 30 July 2003) and the Civil Code (dated 28 Oct 1995) all stipulated some framework for horizontal linkages among the farmers

• State management: the separation of service provision and state managemen(e.g Decree 86), the "equitisation" of state-owned enterprises, and the

decentralization process can make the providers of extension services better respond to the demands of the local farmers

policies and regulations embed a possible environment for the provincties to develop their pro-poor extension services - if they really want to

2.3 Over e

Externally s

.3.1 Frame

Figure 2.3 Framework of pro-poor agricultural extension in Vietnam

vi w of understanding and practices among NGOs and

upported projects on pro-poor extension

ill provide a general introduction to understanding and practicesternally-supported programs/projects in pro-poor agri

Noted that this is nether a summary of the best practices,

f possible strengths and weaknesses of any particular organization or program

work of pro-poor agricultural extension 2

A simple framework of pro-poor agricultural extension is presented in Figure 2.3 below This framework accommodates various efforts of NGOs and externally-funded projects to promote pro-poor agricultural extension in Vietnam (MARD.1996, MARD.2002)

Pro-poor agricultural extension assist the farmers - typically in disadvantaged (poor, mote, ethnic minority) areas - in enhancing horizontal linkages

n livelihood strategies, thus helping them increase income, mitigate risks and gradually get out of poverty Key words underlining all pro-poor extension projects are 'participation' and 'empowerment' with a 'gender-sensitive' manner Participatory rural appraisal (PRA) techniques are normally employed to enhance participation of poor people in the whole cycle of extension program/project – i.e formulation (need assessment, planning, consultation), appraisal, implementation, monitoring and evaluation Community-based, small-scale and self-help farmers’ associations (groups, clubs) are established to give poor people opportunities to say and

to be heard (as the poor people have specific agricultural extension needs that may be completely different from their wealthy neighbors) Core farmers, in the role of extension workers, are supported to build the "farmer-to-farmer" extension in the community

At the same time, there are efforts to strengthen vertical linkages

producers can together better employ their ow

within the agricultural extension system in terms of capacity building, M&E and institutionalization of participatory approaches In NGO and externally supported projects, the trainings (TOT)

V

Province DEMAND

HORIZONTAL linkages

E R

T

I C

A

District [Commune cluster]

Commune

(information, resources)

(information, resources)

about pro-poor approaches are often provided to the provincial/district extension

so that they can then train their subordinates at commune and village levels The

experiences and lessons from village/commune levels are often bro

cardes NGO's ught up to district and rovincial levels, sometimes up to national level (by means of documentation, workshops,

nd adoption in the agriculture system The "socialization of agricultural extension" is also

of service providers (either nies) so that the extension

ed key features, some other typical values and principles of poor agr

pro-• Focus on supporting “soft” elements (hands-on training, field visits, information supply, group formation and opera in order to improve human and

construction) will require participatory ma t, close M&E…

• Limit the su nd free supplies to motivate self-relianc oor and to ensure ity of the impacts

• Coordinate the efforts of agricultural, forestry and fishery extension, veterinary services, plant protection… with other livelihood support activities such as credits, vocational training, land allocation and management etc in order to create

synergy among various services that would benefit the poor

• Encourage diversification by introduce various te hnology packages (not a single agr for self-selection by the farmers

• Develop suitable (proven) technology that do not require up-front large capital investment and can be employed b

planting and farming practices h close, participatory M&E

• Preserve and develop the indigenous knowledge of local residents, particularly ethnic minority groups, in acco limate, geography and traditions

• Organize extension activities fac ticipation of the poor and the

women (with regards to timing, venue, method, contribution level…)

• Promote the good examples of the poor people who get out of poverty, become

p

training, mass media, exposure visits) Some NGOs have been rather successful so far in supporting their provincial/district counterparts (agricultural extension center and/or DARD) to formalize the participatory planning procedures at commune and district levels; and to produce guidelines and training materials of pro-poor extension for wide circulation a

promoted where possible by the NGOs to widen the scope

overnment agents, research institutions, or private compa

g

services can reach the poor in a way suitable to their specific needs, and also suitable to socio-economic, cultural and environmental conditions of the community where the poor belong to

y poor people; emphasis on risk mitigation in

in combi ation witnrdance with local cilitating the par

agricultural extension workers or are elected as leaders of farmers' groups…)

• Put emphasis on gender equity

2.3.2 Participatory approaches to pro-poor agricultural extension

The popular approaches in NGO's pro-poor extension projects are: participatory planning; farmer-to-farmer extension; and farmers’ associations In fact, there is no clear distinction among the three approaches, as they are integrated at commune and village levels

a Participatory planning for agricultural extension

Participatory planning has been employed in most NGOs’ agricultural extension programs/projects

• Use of PRA techniques: PRA techniques (organizing FGDs and IDIs with various probing/ranking/mapping tools) were initially used to understand poverty, assess people’s needs, identify project participants and prioritize the use of available resources Gradually (simplified) PRA procedures may serve as consultation

n plan, and for M&E

means between local people and agricultural extension workers to form basis and provide periodic feedback for agricultural extensio

• Verification of plan: in certain stages, the results of participatory approaches

should be verified by some 'reality check' to make the agricultural extension pmore feasible Participatory planning is followed by participatory implementationTherefore, the planned solutions should base on resources of the f

lans armers themselves and from available external supports (capital, skills, information)

• Connection with community development: participatory/bottom-up planning is nonly applied to agricultural extension, but also to other activities as requested by local people, e.g micro-finance, irrigation management etc Thus, the

implementation and M&E of the agricultural extension plans are often conne

with the whole efforts of community development for poverty reduction

ar er-to-farmer agricultural extension

-to-farmer (or 'farmer-led') extension places the farmers at the center and

mo es them acting as the key change agents for improving agricultural production

co munity

• Farmers to become trainers: competent and voluntary farmers are trained ansupported to become extension workers (may be called 'core farmers

d ' or 'interface

farmers' associations (interest groups, clubs), and also members of the core team to carry out the participatory planning for agricultural extension in the community

• Farmer field school (FFS)

farmers') The training often covers topics of production techniques, community development, PRA, presentation skills… These village/commune extension

workers may serve as leaders of

: a group of farmers gathers together to learn, share and experiment production techniques on the field from start to end of a certain crop The most popular classes are the integrated pest management (IPM) that can be applied for various plants including rice, maize, peanut or tea…

• Participatory technology development (PTD): through participatory studies and experiments, new technologies are developed and proven by the local farmers, often with the help of the technicians or researchers Then these technologies can

be widely diffused among the farmers though formal and informal channels

c Self-help farmers associations (interest groups, extension clubs)

Farmers' associations can help to enhance horizontal connections in the community, for increasing income and reducing risks for their members

• Voluntary co-operation and self-management: basically the associations have their own rules, appoint their own leaders, and maintain periodic activities as

base on a specific tree or plant, or may consist of members having certain features in common

decided by their members A group or club may

• Accessing various production services and supports: Groups and clubs can be focal points for accessing various production services and supports They can

es,

become operation arenas for agricultural extension/veterinary/plant protection workers (who can not reach every individual household); facilitate linkages with mass organizations (farmers, women); act as the entry point for contractual

arrangements with the companies; and provide interface with the banks Besidthe community-based groups could support local authorities in solving local

conflicts, protecting environment, and executing the community ethics

• Possibility of gradual development for self-reliance: Initially small groups may loosely formed, largely reliant on external material supports After some time, many groups and clubs can develop various self-help services like credit and saving, servicing the members on inputs and outputs, sharing labor and plo

powers etc Some groups/clubs may then sustain their operations for mutual

be

ughing

•

benefits of the members and may evolve into new-type co-operatives

Opportunities 'to say and to be heard' for the poor men and women: Participating

in the farmers associations appropriate to their conditions and circumst

poor have opportunities to express their needs and concerns Accordingly such needs and concerns can be better addressed by the concerned agents

ances, the

3 The gaps between current Government's extension

system has a chance to

carry out a separate project

for 'targeting the poor'

From beginning, it is up to

provincial authorities to

decide the targeting criteria

and the level of financing

Recently by the new MARD

regulation, the targeting

criteria of these HEPR

extension projects are the

households who (i) "are

listed as poor" under

MOLISA poverty line; (ii)

"have some labor and

land"; and (iii) "live in

extremely difficult/poor

communes" (Box 3.1)

It is good to see that the

government's pro-poor

extension projects (in

HEPR program and

Program 135) will focus on

the poor remote

communities But literally

policies/practices and the pro-poor extension

This section will discuss the gaps between the current government's extensionicie /practices (extension 'in general' and extension in HEPR program) and the NGO's

r extension practices in Vietnam

Current Government's extension policies and practices

ent government's policies on extension (Decree 13 and subsequent regulation

s no indication of 'poverty reduction' nor 'the poor' - just the 'farmers' in general

t a 'targeting the poor' mandate, it is not surprised that the 'normal' extension

s often promote the 'good farmers' who have 'necessary conditions' in te

bor and counterpart contribution, can bear risks, and normally have bi

the community Until now, biases in favor of targeting the better-off come from the

nt that for the new technologies and resource-intensive models only the betteply (the reliance on 'successful demonstration models' for rapid technon) No doubt that the current extension has contributed much in rural poverty

on, as the poor also benefit from the 'models' indirectly (e.g glancing at and aring to the 'models'); however the poor with their own difficulties and

impossible to 'replicate' their better-off neighbors

'pro-poor extension

' in HEPR program,

ernment's extension

Box 3.1 - Contents of the project "guiding the poor on

business, agriculture extension"

(Circular 56/2003/TT-BNN dated 9 Apr 2003 of MARD on the des ign of

projects within HEPR program)

a Objectives: Equip the poor and hungry households with knowledge so that they can plan for their production, apply advanced techniques in business to improve productivity, quality of trees and animal, at the same time can protect environment and ecosystem; thus they can get out of poverty

b Targeting criteria: Households who are listed as poor under the regulations in Decision 1143/2000/QD-LDTBXH dated 1 Jan 2000 of MOLISA, who have labor and cultivating land, and live in extremely difficult communes (inside Program 135) or poor communes (outside Program 135)

c Activities to be supported:

• support key seedlings and materials for building demonstration models on cultivation and husbandry for the poor and hungry households

• organize training classes to guide the poor on business knowledge, to introduce the poor advanced/new technologies and techniques

• support the information dissemination on newspapers, magazines, booklet, leaflet to guide the poor on business and agricultural/forestry/fishery extension

• support the cadre who travel to the grass root destinations

to guide the poor on agricultural/forestry/fishery extension

• M&E the demonstration models; organize workshops to replicate widely the models

these problematic targeting criteria will prevent many poor households, e.g the

from participating in the government's pro-poor extension Support for farmer

extension and farmers' organizations are absent As for the technical

landless, -to-farmer support: it seems all

), the support is to be for farmers that engage in search, building their own demonstration models by themselves, support for some

dre" ('can bo') - who travel to grass root destinations, becoming

ion agents of the models they find recommendable

he government's

the models - and especially the material inputs for these models - have to come from the

extension service Moreover, the support to "cadre" ("can bo") may exclude the possibility

that farmers (the innovators) can be better extension agents Because to build models in

a participatory manner (and with low-input

in the provincial PPAs recently (see Table 3.1)

Table 3.1 - The Poor and Extension Services

The poor need… The government extension service provides…

To know what they can demand of the

extension services

A reactive service demanded more by the better-off (while the poor need more proactive efforts)

Direct guidance from and interaction with the

xtension workers Few extension workers, many of them do not know ethni

extension workers are not yet available

Training is often one way and delivered indirectly (through village leader)

To deal with specific issues in prod

pr

uction Local extension workers who are weak in

actical hands-on advice

To travel long distances, while livi

with undeveloped traffic ng n areas i Local extension workers who lack means oftransportation

To get input support despite the fa

cannot make contributions

ct that they Budgets for extension service and allowances

for extension workers are too low (esp in disadvantaged areas)

To be introduced to a range of o

own situation and which is highly r

the diverse environment

pp

tions to fit their

es onsive to Single and monotonous technical demonstration models, with little adaptation for

different income groups or environments

To get simple materials with "attrac

and big letters" for less educated p

way of verbal culture in mountainou

3.1.2 Pro-poor extension

Pro-poor extension efforts by the NGOs aim to targeting the poor and the non-poor

Among others, some key practic

and suggested for quite a long tim

s f r a sustainable pro-poor extension as demonstrated

y NGOs and externally supported projects are:

• Institutionalizing the participatory planning Only by listening to the farmers

including the different groups of poor men and women6, facilitating their

involvement in the whole planning process, extension workers can understand their specific constraints and problems (to overcome the inherent disadvantages

of the poor - i.e lack of confidence, hesitation to speak out in community events, preoccupation with daily 'cash-and-mouth' work, frequent working as laborers far from home, illiterate, or the prototype of 'women do, men study'…) and can

respond flexibly Some community development skills are needed

• Developing pro-poor extension methodology, e.g the suitable ways of working

with the poor, e.g 'risk-mitigated' or 'well-researched/proven' advice, 'hands-on'

working conditions and remuneration)

with a more flexible budgeting/accounting so that a bigger portion of the (poor)

poo

omeopriate methodology or capable gr

) there may ,

en

romoted in line with the recent decentralization

State budget law (Law 01/2002/QH11 adopted 16 Dec 2002, alid from 2004 budgeting year) places much more autonomy for the provincial authorities

or pro-poor extension now can be (or must

more women and ethnic minorities, better

access to the designed extension activities

subject to close monitoring and evaluation

away from serving the poor m

It is very critical to prevent the drift omen

h the 'tar

In fact, it is always easier to say than to do

NGO's extension projects still find hard to

external (financial

geting the poor' message, as mantain the focus on serving the poor after th

ish Here one key challenge is the fina

ch of targeting the poor in the 'nstem in Vietnam, especially in the integrated (mountainous, remote, eth

monitored, studied and documented

ority) areas This issue should be fu

Another key challenge for targeting the r is that the above messages should be

integrated Experiences show that even w

projects is available; the poor men and w

lack of participatory planning, appr

n money for government's HEPR extensio

n can not benefit much, because there is a

ass root network Incontrast, in other programs (e.g even in the

be an ambitious agenda to improve planning

without a clear targetin

ADB-funded $60million program budgeting and human resources; but then

o guarantee that the extension systesustain the effective targeting to the poor m

Also, pro-poor extension should be p

and women7

process The newly-revised

v

to allocate their available budget Many things f

be) decided at the provincial l

6 The concept of being “poor” may be used flexibly, either using the MOLISA poverty line, or using certain

8 For example, by the new Government's Decree 121 dated 21 October 2003 on “Policies and treatments on commune-level officials and civil servants”, the position of “planning-transport-irrigation-agriculture, forestry,

aquaculture” will be half-time commune official These half-time officials receive only stipend – “phu cap” that

will be decided by the provincial people’s committees basing on local context and local budget availability

'relative' criteria (e.g having less than 1000 m2 of land) as emerged through PRA's wealth ranking exercises

7 A mandatory minimum ratio of the participants being poor and/or women may be required in certain poor extension projects/activities

low-nd, homogenous, resource-intensive farming; but not so suitable for the poor's high-land

e beneficial to the poor The positive signs are:

en

• Improved combination between training and providing inputs and credit (though

Technical training

Current Government's extension policies and practices

cal training is one core activity of the government's extension (the other 2 core

s are information dissemination and demonstration models) Expenditures fo

al training normally account for 30% of total budget of the national ext

s (Circular 02-LB/TT dated on 2 March 1993 regulatinglementation of Decree 13 on extension), training expenditures for short-term classes,

on the field, workshops and seminars can only be of 3 categories: (i) allowancners by the regulated/fixed rates; (ii) costs of organizing training classes, like

ls, tools, classroom, accommodation etc.; and (iii) 'subsistence provision' for thenees at grass root levels (temporarily regulated as 15,000 dong, i.e 1$ per day) , is 'subsistence support' for trainees is a rather controversy issue; as providingoney for the training participants may create 'false demand', and may do harm fotainability of training activities when there is no such money later

to a classroom and lecturing on the 'standard techniques' fo

for a district extension worker Such 'technical' training can contribute to in

tion and food security, but many times it may create more vulnerability for the

n fact, many messages by current extension

la

farming to cope with the small, scattered, sloping, poor-irrigated land conditions where some indigenous knowledge are required As observed by Beckman (2001) that

"extension messages often concentrate on strategies for income generation, which would

require more resources and knowledge than are currently available to the poor"

With the HEPR/135 program, there have been many efforts from government's extension system to make technical training mor

• Less 'lecturing' style, with more hands-on training on the field ("cam tay chi viec")

For example, IPM training now is rather popular

• More training classes at village levels for easier participation of the poor, often upon request of local authorities (in the past training classes only at commune level so only 1-2 'representatives' of each village can attend)

• Wider training topics rather than 'technical', like the 'household economy' training

• Better link with mass organizations (farmers', youth and women's union): respond better to the needs of different groups of men and wom

HEPR/135 extension and provincial agriculture projects)

However, up to now there are still many challenges for technical training in both government's extension 'in general' and extension in HEPR/135 program:

• There is no policy on carrying out researches of technologies and agri models appropriate for the poor Also there is no formal guideline in government's

extension system about pro-poor training methodology For example, letter' training materials are often produced by top level; while poor farmers'

'too-much-experiences and indigenous knowledge are not included in training material

• Training is still often for promoting the top-down, pre-fabricated and monotonousagricultural models; while it is not for promoting a range of options to be adapted

by the poor farmers basing on their specific conditions and needs

• 'Technical' training is not enough (a good technician/engineer is not necessarily a good extension worker) The current training system for extension workers (in universities/colleges, in TOT courses) focuses too much on technical matters;

while the interaction w

'social development' skills like fa

ith the farmers especially the poor requires many other

cilitation, community development, PRAs, and

till lacking

tion by the

about the need to work in groups to help each other As stereotyped in the saying that

s

c) needs of the women,

some hands-on 'organization development' skills like group building

• The extension workers (full-time or part-time, locally sought) are s

necessary conditions for practicing the required participatory approaches

Remarkable reasons are rigid/fixed budgeting and accounting, no budget for

training need assessment as well as for monitoring and evaluation…

3.2.2 Pro-poor extension

Pro-poor extension as promoted by NGOs and externally supported projects uses some key proven approaches in their trainings:

• Household economy support (demand-led farming system support): Consider

training as one/first step in the whole household economy support strategy, taking into account all limitations and choices of the poor Never bring in pre-determined and monotonous solutions/models, but a range of options for selec

farmers Only introduce to the poor the proven options that do not require many resources In training, indigenous knowledge is recognized and further developed

in combination with advanced technologies, especially in mountainous areas

• From changing awareness to changing behaviors: in many cases, the very

first contacts with the poor often result in a feeling that 'the poor do not want

training – just want grants', or 'the poor do not know what they want', or even 'the

poor do not know that they are poor'

In many NGO's community development projects the first trainings are not about technical, but participatory facilitation to create awareness about poverty,

'the poor like the deep-sleepy people ('ngu me') who should be waken up'

• Farmer-to-farmer approach through group works: training through FFS,

training with PTD approach, with 'farmers as teachers', particularly for overcoming the language barriers in mountainous areas As the poor lack social capital and human capital, pro-poor training often aims to improve the confidence and voice

of the poor men and women (e.g without group works, the poor are often not invited by local officials to attend the training classes)

• Gender-sensitive training: often, if the "head of household" is invited to

participate in a training class, the man will go The NGO extension projects alwaystry to respond to the specific (immediate/direct and strategi

to minimize the "men study, women do" prejudice in the community

Close monitoring and evaluation: without a close M&E,

other supports to the poor) can not fulfill its aim The M&E should be participatory

to facilitate the sharing of experiences and lessons learnt within the

en ral, improving training methodology is among the most successful outputs in m

pro-poor extension projects so far The key problems are the institutionalizatio

stainability of the introduced training methodology within government's extensio

re that the improvements will not vanish after the end of external supportsmple, it is critical to insert some clauses about (participatory) monitoring andlua ion in the Decree 13 on extension, or to broaden the scope of training activities incular 56/2003/TT-BNN dated 9 April 2003 on government's pro-poor extensionjec s in HEPR program

by the recent PPAs throughout the country.9

put supply and product promotion

.1 Current government's extension policies and practices

ent system, the extension workers introduce new seeds, breeds, animal

es, and fertilizers in their training and demonstration models Technical train

ent's extension often promotes new inputs (with 'standard' technolo

g

produced by research institutes,

endorsed by national or prov

• in government's pro-poor extension policies (in HEPR projects): 100 % of total required inputs for demonstration models are granted to the poor participants tice of NAEC's 'normal' national ex

is for input support, 30% for training, and the remaining 10% for information &nication

ing to Decree 20/1998/ND-CP dated 31 Jan 1998 on the trade promo

unt inous areas, the government continues its policy to subsidize transport co

l essential commodities (iodized salt, oil, school notebooks, agricultural materials -

gs and fertilizers) The subsidy budgets are transferred to enterprises purchasin' products in mountainous communes, villages in "category III" zones In addition,ountainous provinces also support their farmers by further subsidizing 30-50% ofeds So normally the key inputs that farmers in "P

m nes are buying in the market today are heavily subsidized This subsi

hes the poor at all - may help reduce production costs, but may increase the e' attitude, affecting the sustainability of their livelihoods (e.g drawing attention rom the need to also maintain and improve local varieties) Furthermore, in some the subsidy effectively frustrates local seed production initiatives (n

s ed producers, but also local tea nurseries) Furthermore, price subsidies do no

o target the poor in remote areas; because the poor have to “borrow first, payborrowing rice, agricultural supplies from agents/private traders, and pay by thelater

own products in crop season right after harvest), thus they often do not have cash available in time to buy the inputs at subsidized prices

According to the loan agreement with ADB for "agricultural sector development program", the Government committed to no longer provide subsidy of hybrid maize seed and substantially reduce the subsidy of hybrid rice seed in the coming years (ADB, 2002) The problems is the government's extension system (in mountainous provinces) up to now is not yet well prepared for this 'subsidy waiving' commitment

in July/August 2003, 12 provincial PPAs were undertaken by donors and some NGOs in all 7 regions of the country to provide inputs for VDR 2004 prepared by the World Bank (WB), and CPRGS annual progress report prepared by MPI

9