Format | |
---|---|
BibTeX | |
MARCXML | |
TextMARC | |
MARC | |
DublinCore | |
EndNote | |
NLM | |
RefWorks | |
RIS |
Files
Abstract
A consensus exists that extension services, if functioning effectively, improve agricultural
productivity through providing farmers with information that helps them to optimize their use of
limited resources. Variations in management practices and husbandry skills among small
farmers in Kenya are very great. Tremendous poverty-reducing benefits could be reaped by
bringing the production costs of the most inefficient farmers to mean productivity levels.
Achieving these gains in maize production efficiency will depend on many factors, but extension
is likely to be among the most important. Therefore, the costs to the nation of having an underperforming
extension service – in terms of smallholder productivity, incomes, and poverty
reduction, and the ability to survive or even thrive after the reduction in import tariffs as implied
by impending COMESA and EAC trade agreements – are very high.
The objective of this study is to assess the range of alternative food crop and livestock
extension services currently operating in Kenya, what works, what doesn’t, and why. The report
is fundamentally descriptive, providing knowledge on the nature of the existing extension
providers, their characteristics, approaches employed and the challenges they face. Based on
successful cases, we identify attributes that may be important for future discussions about
extension service provision in Kenya and the role of the government in such a scenario. The
study covered 16 districts representing the various agro-regional zones present in Kenya. It
employed qualitative methods and focused on the private and public extension service providers.
Discussions were also held with other stakeholder in the agricultural extension service realm
about their experiences and perceptions of the existing extension systems and approaches.
The study highlights five (6) important findings: (1) private extension provision is
generally skewed towards well-endowed regions and high-value crops. Remote areas and poor
producers especially those growing low-value crops with little marketable surplus are poorly
served. Non-profit private providers are targeting them. But their scope is limited. (2) The
public extension service appears to be high-cost compared to private commercial and non-profit
extension services. (3) Since public resources for extension are very constrained, it may make
sense for public extension not to duplicate or overlap in the same areas that are being
provisioned more efficiently by commercial and non-profit systems. This would leave more
public resources for concentrating extension services for farmers in areas that are remote and
poorly served by the commercial systems. (4) However, the commercial and non-commercial
systems benefit from the presence of the public extension service. The alternative systems rely on
public extension workers for training and appropriate management advice, so even if the public
system was to withdraw to the more remote areas where private extension is unprofitable, it may
be appropriate to institute some type of commercial contracting of public sector extension system
staff so that the latter can impart needed skills and capacity building of the commercial
extension systems. (5) The government should consider contracting the private sector to offer
extension services in the disadvantaged regions. Contracting out extension services makes it
possible to take advantage of all of the talent and experience existing in the field but does not
eliminate a government role which, in addition to funding, ensures quality assurance, oversight,
and provision of training and information to contracted services providers. (6) The weight of
evidence suggests, in most cases, that private extension is not a substitute for public extension
and the public sector should funding extension significantly but in ways that do not duplicate
services already being provided by sustainable alternative extension providers.