Coombs, P.H., & Ahmed, M. 1978. Attacking developing nations are highly dependent on rural poverty: How nonforrnal education can help. agriculture, it remains a weak sector of their Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. economies. These conditions point out the urgent need Rogers, E.M. 1971. Communication of in- to both stimulate production and enhance the relative novations. New York: The Free Press. stature of agriculture in developing nations. Thuemmel, W.L., & Welton, R.F. 1981. AATEA Definitions of Agricultural Education survejj of teacher education activity in international A number of individuals have addressed the' agriculture. Paper presented at the American Associa- development process for agriculture, and in so doing tion of Teacher Educators in Agriculture, Atlanta, GA. have referred to agricultural education. The result is a United Nations Development Program 1979. variety of meanings assigned to the term 'agricultural Evaluation study no. 2: Rural development. New Y ork: education' when used in the context of international The United Nations. development. To those most familiar with the U.S. educational AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION: system, agricultural education commonly refers to those activities directed at the preparation of teachers Definitions and Implications of vocational agriculture. However, this is not the common definition as viewed from the perspective of For International Development international development. D. Craig Anderson For instance, Roberts (1980) infers that in- Introduction ternational agricultural education consists of programs Purpose in higher education such as short-term trainees at U.S. The purpose of this manuscript is to discuss the universities, U.S. faculty degree teaching in foreign role of agricultural education as one component of the countries, and short-term training in-country con- agricultural programs of developing nations. Certainly ducted by university faculty members. Broadening this the complexity of agriculture requires an array of perspective, others classify agricultural education as inputs,' all of which are important in strengthening the the general mission of colleges of agricultural in higher agricultural development process. This manuscript will education - quality instruction in all agricultural sub- present a rationale for education ii agriculture as one ject areas (Love, 1982). of the most crucial of such inputs. To accomplish this A popular interpretation of agricultural education objective, following sections will address (1) the is that it is fundamentally synonymous with agricultural definitions attributed to the term 'agricultural extension. This can include either programs for education' in the context of international agricultural training extension workers or, most commonly, field development, (2) a justification for the inclusion of programs directed at small farmers. Indeed, extension agricultural education in development programs and in some form is commonly visualized as the primary (3) the general role agricultural education could mechanism for promoting increased productions via assume in such programs. the diffusion of new technologies and their ultimate Setting the Stage adoptiori by farm clientele. Adult education programs During the past three decades, international at- for rural populations are a form of extension that are tention has been directed at agricultural production in viewed by some as a means for educating adult farmers, general, and specifically at the development of the both in agriculture and other subject areas (Hall and agricultural sectors of the world's lesser developed Kidd, 1978). Others advocate the utilization of in- nations. Agricultural development for these countries digenous knowledge systems and indigenous is critical. Characteristically, these nations are heavily technology in both adult education and extension. dependent on agriculture as their primary economic Brokensha et a1.(980) contend that this methodology activity (Tinnermeier, 1974: Ryan and Binswanger, greatly enhances the sucess of extension programs. 1979). Malassis (1975) indicates that developing nations Coombs and Ahmed (1974) are also proponents of typically (1) have extremely high percentages of their nonformal extension education as a means for populations engaged in agriculture. (2) maintain a high achieving rural development, including agriculture. percentage of agricultural exports in relation to total They define it as "any organized, systematic, exports, and (3) have agricultural sectors which educational activity carried on outside the framework contribute heavily to the total gross domestic product (GDP). Ironically, however, agricultural GDP per 'Inputs are of two general types. Insdtudonal support inpu~are agricultural worker rarely exceeds even half the per policies, procedures. and mechanbms whlch are conductive to capita GDP in these same nations. In short, although agricultural growth (e.g.. extension education programs. adequate market channek, favorable pricing mechanisms). Production- Anderson prepared thb manuscript as a research assbtant In the oriented inputs are resources and practices contributing to Departnient of Agricultural Education at Iowa Smte Unlvenlty, production enhancement (e.g.. new and improved pknt variedes. Ames, IA. 50010 fertilizer and pesticide usage, water management).

34 NACTA Journal - June 1984 of the forn~al system ....Thus defined, nonformal Certainly, a tremendous education effort will be education includes, for example, agricultural extension required if these predictions are even to be partially and farmer training programs.. .. "(p.8). fulfilled. The term 'agricultural education in developing One must also consider that in most countries in countries' has also been used to describe, in aggregate, greatest need of agricultural development, almost all the various training projects associated with the in- arable land is currently under production (Rojko, ternational research centers located around the world, 1978). The major constraint to increased productivity is even though these training efforts are not coordinated the education of producers in the proper use of im- among the centers (Rockefeller, 1971; 1976). proved technologies. Indeed, that is the most plausible Some indi\iduals have suggested definitions for path to improvement in the agricultural sector. The agricultilral education that extend beyond those technologies are currently available. Their innovative reviewed above. Curle(1970), for example, presents his adaption, adoption, and application are the elements to thesis that education as it relates 10 agriculture includes which agricultural education can greatly contribute. the whole range of formal programs which can be Agricultural education, as defined herein, can, initiated by governments. This includes not only ex- and does, have a positive impact in technology trans- tension training, secondary and higher education, but fer. Empirical studies support this assertion. Shukla's teacher training and vocational education in work among small farmers in India led him to conclude agriculture, as well. Similarly, Kimnlel (1982) and that, "An effective educational program can do much Malassis ( 1975) interpret agricultural education to shorten the time lag between the discovery of a new broadly, covering a wide array of possible programs practice and its adoption by all farmers" (Shukla, 1971, whose purpose is instruction in agriculture. p. 73). Similarly, Moock (1980) utilized an economic An all-embracing explanation of agricultural production function model to measure the marginal education has also been offered by Habito (1980), who product of education (its effect on the utilization of presents an outline for manpower resources in farm inputs) in a large maize project in Kenya. His agriculture that encompasses everything from non- research yielded the following conclusions: for~naleducation to highly technical education at the Any form of education which imparts university level. knowledge about the production process directly, It is evident that many definitions have and can be or which enhances the capacity to acquire given to agricultural education. especially as it relates knowledge about the production process from to international agricultural development. One must other sources, should raise the individual surely conclude that agricultural education, as it producer's surface of production possibilities. pertains to international development. consists of any With any particular combination of inputs, the and all organized programs whose purpose is education producer with more production-relevant or training in agricultural subjects. education can (and will) produce more output. (Moock, 1981, p. 738) Justification and Rationale These, and other similar observations of the Previous sections have been directed at setting a positive effects of education in agricultural projects in proper stage for the topic and reviewing the meaning of developing nations are aptly summarized in the international education in agriculture. The next step is following concept expressed by Ruttan: to answer the question. "Is there a place for agricultural Productivity differences in agriculture are education in agricultural development?" The response increasingly a function of investments in the appears obvious. If the development of agriculture is, education of rural people . . . rather than natural as has been demonstrated, critical to the economies of resources endowments. Indeed, the one developing nations, and if education has a legitimate inescapable implication of the results of our cross function to perform in agriculture (a thesis everyone country analysis is the importance of literacy and involved in agricultural education in any of its forms schooling among agricultural producers and of could subscribe to), then one can deduce that technical and scientific education in the agri- agricultural education is a legitimate component of cultural sciences. (Ruttan. 1973, p. 5) agricultural development. The preceding points clearly both delineate and For example, in articulating the need for justify the position that agricultural education has a agricultural education, Kimmel (1982) remarks that significant role to play in development. The fun- according' to FA0 estimates, in the next 20 years the damental rationale is that agricultural sectors in less total number of agricultural extension workers in the developed countries can progress only to the extent world will reach 1.25 million. This is somewhere near that the people involved in agriculture progress, and four and a half times the current total. The vast that these people progress significantly only through majority of these. and other agriculturalists, will have viable systems of educarion in agriculture. Granted, to be trained in their own or neighboring nations. other inputs into the sector are also required, but their

NACTA 'Journal - June 1984 use and application are entirely dependent upon the agricultural development, as postulated by Mosher ability of prepared individuals to capitalize upon them. ( 1966). it must be afforded a sufficient amount of public Consequently, the preparation of these people--their planning and resources to enable it to truly com- education--is crucial since it arms them with the variety nlement growth (and ignite growth) in agriculture. of mental and physical skills that efficient modern (as opposed to traditional) agriculture requires. Conclusions The Role Agricultural education. in the context of in- While it is clear that there is a role for agricultural ternational development, embraces a wide range of education in development, it is difficult to state or to meanings, for it is any organized activity that has as its project to what extent that role will be interpreted and purpose instruction in agriculture. It is the process by manifest by individual nations in agricultural which specialists are produced, agriculturalists are development programs. However, the question can trained, and farmers are assisted. It is, or should be, a well be asked, "What role should it rightfully have in a partner with other program inputs in the process of balanced development plan?" development in agriculture. Given the current Curle (1970) advocates that in developing econoniic importance of agricultural sectors in societies, in view of their substantial dependence on developing societies, agricultural education, in its agriculture, significant attention should be given to the fullest sense, is thus elevated to a role of great im- enhancement of education in agriculture. More portance. specifically, he nientions these actions: Development in agriculture must begin with (a) To inquire into the incentives needed to people. Their knowledge and skills are the primary induce persons to train as agricultural scientists input--the human resource. All other inputs are and other specialists. secondary. Progressive agriculture requires capable (b) To study and promote the teaching of science individuals at all levels, from the policy maker to the and agriculture at various levels of schooling. farmer and from the researcher to the extension agent, (c) To give the cultivators themselves as much who are skillful in their professions and who un- education in agriculture as possible, both through derstand the intricacies of agriculture. Indeed, the extension work and. where feasible, through oportunity cost of not sustaining a strong, diversified, short courses of instruction. and viable system of agricultural education is too high. (Curle, 1970, p. 158) Of the many constraints inhibiting agricultural Although Curle presented these ideas more than a development today, perhaps the greatest is the failure decade ago. they are just as applicable today. More to recognize this fact. recently, the findings of the Presidential Mission on Agricultural education can be viewed as a key, one Agricultural Development in Central America and the that can unlock long-lasting benefits. Withour it, those Caribbean (Presidential Mission, 1980) suggest a similar benefits may be forever "locked in," never to see the course for education in agriculture. To summarize, the light of day. The hope is that the key will be turned-- Commission's recommendations are to: ( 1) expand that it will open a door for developing nations and allow educational opportunities in agriculture through strong them to improve their contribution to their societies national and regional education and training programs, and the world community. and through major in-service training for agriculturalists; (2) strengthen efforts for developing References and applying improved technology by initiating major Brokensha, D., D. M. Warren and 0. Werner agricultural research programs and improving (Editors). 1980. Indigenous knowledge systems and government extension programs; (3) elevate the development. University Press of America. Inc. prominence of agriculture as a profession. and to Washington, D. C. 460pp. provide opportunties and inducement- to young people Coombs, Philip H. and Manzoor Ahmed. 1974. to study agriculture; and (3) initiate programs to Attacking rural poverty: How nonformal educadon can educate adult farmers and farm families both in general help. The ~ohns~o~kins University Press. Baltimore. literacy skills and the use of modem production 292 pp. techniques. Curle, Adam. 1970. Education strategy for The preceding comments demonstrate that developing societies: A study of educational and social agricultural education can assume a variety of program factors In relation to economic growth. 2nd ed. roles. They are a clear signal to governments in Tavistock Publications. London. 180 pp. developing nations of ways in which the spectrum of Habito. C. P. 1980. Suggested guide-lines for agricultural education can be significantly enlarged to planning and implementing national programmes of stimulate and support the agricultural sector. Each agricultural education and training. Pages 28-38 in 1979 nation must determine for itself its role for education in Training for Agriculture and Rural Development. Food agriculture. But, if education is to be an accelerator of and Agriculture Organization. Rome.

NACTA Journal - June 1984 Hall, Budd L. and J. Roby Kidd (Editors). 1978. Tinnermeier, Ronald L. 1974. Credit for small Adult learning: a design for action: A comprehensive farmers. Pages 97-116 in H.H. Biggs and R.L. Tin- international survey. Pergamon Press Ltd. Oxford. 337 nermeier, ed~.Small farm agricultural development PP- problems. Colorado State University. Fort Collins, Kimmel, D. C. 1982. Impact of international Colorado. perspectives on American agriculture in the 80's. - -- NACTA Journal 26(3): 14-19. The "World Food Situation" Love, Gene M. 1982. Securing America's food and As an Initial Lesson Theme agricultural resource base. Paper prepared for the Northeast Higher Education Committee. a sub- In Introductory Poultry Science committee of the Northeast Regional Council on Food S.J. Bowen, and Agricultural Science, USDA. 22 pp. Malassis, Louis. 1975. Agriculture and the B. Howarth, Jr. and development process: Tentative guidelines for K.W. Washburn teaching. The UNESCO Press. Paris. 284 pp. Abstract Moock, Peter R. 1981. Education and technical The "world food situation" was developed as the efficiency in small-farm production. Economic theme for a three day lesson entitled "Introduction to Development and Cultural Change 29(4): 723-739. Poultry Science" in Poultry Science 202 at the Mosher, Arthur T. 1966. Getting agriculture University of Georgia. The objectives were: I) to moving. Essentials for development and moder- understand the magnitude of the world food situation nization. Fredrick A. Praeger, Publishers. New York. 2) to understarld the involvement of public policy in 190 PP. this issue and 3) to understand the role of the Presidential Mission on Agricultural Development developmerrt of poultry science and the poultry in- in Central America and the Caribbean. 1980. dustry in providing high quality low cost food for the Agricultural development and economic progress in world. On the first day a slide tape was presented that the Caribbean basin. Tallahassee, Florida. 137 pp. described the problem of world hunger and discussed Roberts, N. Keith. 1980. The population-food the involvement of public policy in this issue. This was squeeze: Education for survival. 62nd Faculty Honor followed by a discussion of the involvement of public Lecture. Utah State University. Logan, Utah. policy in the development of the Land Grant College Rockefeller Foundation. 1974. Strategies for System. The second day continued with a discussion of agricultural education in developing countries. The how Poultry Science Departments function in this Rockefeller Foundation. New Y ork. 444 pp. system and the contribution made by scientists in these Rockefeller Foundation. 1976. Strategies for departments. On the final day, there was a discussion agricultural education in developing countries. Second of the economic importance of the poultry industry to Bellagio conference, 1975. The Rockefeller Foun- Georgia and the United States. A slide-tape program dation. New York. 98 pp. presented at the end of the third day demonstrated the involvement of the poultry industry in feeding the Rojko, Anthony, et al. 1978. Alternative futures world. A quiz was giver1 on the fourth class day. Verbal for world food in 1985. U.S. Department of response of the class at the end of the lesson and Agriculture, Foreign Agriculture Economic Report wn'tten evaluation at the end of the course indicated No. 146. that the objectives of the lesson were met. Analysis of Ruttan. Vernon W. 1973. Induced technical and grades indicated that this lesson had little effect on the instutional change and the future of agriculture. The final course grade. Agricultural Development Council, Inc., New York. 11 One of the major issues confronting present day PP- agricultun'sts is the growing problem of world hunger. Ryan, James G. and Hans P. Binswanger. 1979. This problem is magnified by the increasing opposition Socioeconomic constraints to agricultural development of developing world countries to settle for poor nutri- in the semi-arid tropics and ICRISAT's approach. tion in their human populations. Even though it is an is- Pages 57-67 in Vrinda Kumble, ed. Proceedings of the sue important to all of agriculture, few Poultry Science International symposium on development and transfer students at the University of Georgia considered this of technology for rainfed agriculture and the SAT issue in their coursework. For example, the Introduc- farmer. ICRSAT, Andhra Pradesh, India. tory Poultry Science course (PS 202) encompasses sub- Shukla. V.P. 1971. Interaction of technological ject areas ranging from endocrinology to management. change and irrigation in determining farm resource use, Jabalpur District, India 1967-1968. Cornell In- Bowen is a postdoctoral fellow at Rntgers. Howarth b an associate ternational Agricultural Development Bulletin 20. professor and Washhnrn Is a professor, both at the Unlverslty of Cornell University. Ithaca, New York. 73 pp. Georgia.

NACTA Journal - June 1984