Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2

doi: 10.5191/jiaee.2018.25202

U.S. International Agricultural Development: What Events, Forces, Actors, and Philosophical Perspectives Presaged Its Approach?

Brandon M. Raczkoski Center for Veterinary Health Sciences Oklahoma State University

M. Craig Edwards Oklahoma State University

Abstract The philosophical perspectives, including significant actors, events, and forces, that influenced and presaged the United States’ approach to international agricultural development are somewhat unclear. The purpose of this historical narrative, therefore, was to understand the key drivers responsible for forging the U.S. framework for technical agricultural assistance abroad, especially in its formative years. The study’s findings were reported by answering two questions. The first question explored historical events, including federal legislative acts and statutes, which precipitated the U.S. approach to international agricultural development. The second research question addressed the philosophical primers imbued in the U.S. approach to international agricultural development, including significant actors responsible for championing it. We assert the environmental pragmatism of Liberty Hyde Bailey and its other proponents was the philosophical foundation and worldview that informed many of the pioneers who guided the U.S. approach to offering agricultural assistance as part of the nation’s international development efforts. As such, we recommend the inclusion of certain aspects of environmentalism in agricultural and extension educator preparation with implications for international and domestic development, including long-term sustainability initiatives.

Keywords: environmentalism; Extension; international agricultural development (IAD); sustainable agriculture; United States Agency for International Development (USAID)

11 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2

Introduction the significant factors influencing the U.S. Foreign assistance is viewed as a approach to IAD and, thereby, provide fundamental instrument of U.S. foreign additional clarity for its practitioners and policy and supports many objectives their counterparts in many of the least (Tarnoff & Lawson, 2016). Three key developed countries (LDCs) impacted by rationales supporting the U.S. approach to such. foreign assistance have been proffered: LDCs are defined as “low-income national security, commercial, and countries confronting severe structural humanitarian (Tarnoff & Lawson, 2016). impediments to sustainable development” National security has been the foremost (United Nations [UN], 2017, para. 1). They concern of U.S. assistance programs. For are extremely vulnerable to economic and example, following World War II, U.S. aid environmental shock and characterized as programs primarily addressed the incursion having inadequate levels of human capital of communist influence around the globe. (UN, 2017). According to the UN, LDCs Next, commercial interests have long been receive exclusive access to “certain viewed as a mechanism for promoting U.S. international support measures” (UN, 2017, exports. Foreign assistance always has been para. 3) in particular areas, such as a way to create new customers for U.S. international trade and development products and to improve the global assistance. Over time, this included various competitive environment for U.S. forms of assistance from the United States. companies. Third, humanitarian concerns have driven both short- and long-term U.S. Purpose and Research Questions assistance programs in response to disasters This study’s purpose was to examine and crises as well as long-term development the historical events, forces, and actors that assistance programs aimed at eradicating influenced and thereafter guided the U.S. and reducing food insecurity and poverty, to government’s approach to offering name a few of its objectives (Tarnoff & agricultural technical assistance to other Lawson, 2016). nations, including LDCs. Two research To these aims, U.S. technical questions guided this inquiry: assistance abroad has received generally 1. What significant historical events, widespread support from the American including interagency federal public and policymakers alike. However, legislative acts and statutes, codified little is known about the origins of U.S. the U.S. government’s approach to technical assistance as a form of advisory services in international agricultural offering technical agricultural development (IAD), including its assistance in its international historically significant actors, events, and development efforts? forces. It was the intention of the authors, 2. What philosophical forces, including therefore, to understand more fully the basis historically significant actors, for and evolution of the U.S. government’s influenced the U.S. government’s approach to providing technical assistance approach to offering technical abroad to support IAD. To understand the role of U.S. technical assistance in IAD, it agricultural assistance in its was necessary to examine the historical international development efforts? evidence regarding its origins. This study aimed to present a historical perspective on

12 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2

Methods and Procedures authenticity (Johnson & Christensen, 2010; In 2002, McDowell published a McDowell, 2002). In all, evidentiary comprehensive guide for conducting documents were sources as identified in the historical investigations. He suggested that manuscript’s references section. examining the past could illuminate the Triangulating multiple sources supported the similarities between conditions governing study’s credibility and validity, as both past and present with implications for recommended by Tracy (2010). the future. Therefore, historical research methods were used to answer this study’s Findings research questions. According to Camp and Crunkilton (1985), “[t]wo things emerge as Research Question #1: What significant the central foci in all such historical works: historical events, including interagency people who have made a difference and federal legislative acts and statutes, events that signal major accomplishments or codified the U.S. government’s approach turning points in the profession’s to offering technical agricultural development” (p. 57). “[Having a] better assistance in its international understanding of the past places us in a more development efforts? advantageous position to appreciate change The provision of technical in the present and to try and learn from past assistance, including programs involving mistakes” (McDowell, 2002, p. 5). agriculture, is not a concept first dawned by McDowell (2002) added: “Historical the U.S. government (American Council of research does not consist in the mere Voluntary Agencies for Foreign Service collection of ‘facts,’ but rather in the [ACVAFS], 1953). For example, according interrelationship between factual evidence to the Near East Foundation [NEF], “the and the interpretation of this evidence by practice NEF established of working in historians” (p. 4). His recommendations tandem with foreign governments and local were followed in conducting this study. organizations . . . provided a model for Historical data were derived from many of today’s most well-known primary and secondary sources, including development organizations – including U.S. legislative acts, reports, and statutes; USAID and the Peace Corps” (“History,” peer-refereed journal articles; and books. In 2016, para. 7). addition, official U.S. government websites The U.S. Congress authorized the were examined for relevant content. The Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) Act (46 information was accessed and collected Stat. 497) in 1930. This act assigned the using online search engines provided by the FAS to lead USDA’s efforts in improving main library at Oklahoma State University. the agricultural systems of LDCs, including Key search terms included agricultural their international trade capacity, a precursor development, environmentalism, to its present-day objectives of partnering international agricultural and extension with USAID to deliver high-impact food aid education, sustainability, sustainable programs and support for agricultural agriculture, United States Department of development initiatives (FAS, 2015). The Agriculture (USDA), and United States FAS mission reads “linking U.S. agriculture Agency for International Development to the world to enhance export opportunities (USAID). The study’s sources of data were and global food security”; its motto is subjected to internal and external criticism simply “linking U.S. Agriculture to the by the authors to ensure their accuracy and World” (FAS, 2015, para. 6).

13 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2

Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) decentralized administration through local inherited immense challenges during his farmer committees; 2) referenda to presidency beginning in 1933, especially the determine administrative policies such as Great Depression – a singularly dark period quotas and penalties; 3) group discussion in American history (McCalla, 1969). By the and adult education to promote ‘intelligent 1930s, persistent drought was evident participation’; and, 4) cooperative planning throughout the Great Plains region, which in policy formulation and localization of manifested crop failures, soil erosion, and programs” (p. 15). As part of the New Deal, large dust storms (Schubert, Suarez, Pegion, the Emergency Conservation Work Program Koster, & Bacmeister, 2004). According to (P. L. 73-5), popularized as the Civilian Lal, Reicosky, and Hanson (2007), the U.S. Conservation Corps (CCC), was a public agricultural revolution, especially escalating works relief program for youth and the use of the plow, which occurred over many unemployed during the Great Depression generations, invariably transformed the (Maher, 2007). American landscape. They noted the “[u]se The framework for the CCC was of the plow expanded rapidly with the largely influenced by the emergence of introduction of the ‘steam horse’ [, i.e., service-learning as a method of instruction tractor,] in 1910 that led to widespread and success of another service-learning severe soil erosion and environmental program, i.e., the National Youth degradation culminating in the Dust Bowl of Administration [NYA] (Roberts & Edwards, the 1930s” (p. 1). Beginning in the late 2015). Similar to the NYA, the CCC 1800s, however, strong agrarian movements provided employment opportunities to youth in rural America, e.g., emergence of the and unskilled workers. It paid these Grange and Farmers’ movement, sought individuals to engage in civic activities advanced methods of agriculture that would directly related to conservation and effectively reduce the negative management of natural resources on federal environmental, social, and economic and state lands (Williams, 2005). CCC impacts of prolonged intensive tillage, such activities related to agricultural conservation as water, wind, and soil erosion. Later, were also widespread; for example, Corps “Hugh Hammond Bennett led the soil members built terraces for farmers and dug conservation movement in the U.S. in the farm ponds (Urban & Wagoner, 2014). 1920s and 1930s, and urged the nation to The National Industrial Recovery address the ‘national menace’ of soil Act of 1933 (P. L. 73-67) codified erosion” (Lal et al., 2007, p. 5). Bennett’s conservation of soil and water as a national zeal for conservation stemmed from his priority, including funding to fight soil experience “studying soils and agriculture erosion as the result of a combination of nationally and internationally” (Lal et al., drought and poor agricultural practices 2007, p. 5). (NRCS, 2016). Excessive use of the The Roosevelt Administration moldboard plow on the nation’s prairies had famously instituted its New Deal, i.e., the marginalized ecological stability and soil National Industrial Recovery Act, focused health in favor of mechanized production on relief, recovery, and reform in 1933 agriculture to meet both domestic and (Fraser & Gerstle, 1989), which included international demand for food and fiber programs to assist U.S. farmers. Gilbert products (Lal et al., 2007). Moreover, a (2015) noted the New Deal exemplified four wind-break program, the Shelterbelt Project principles of agricultural democracy: “1) of 1934, was also implemented by FDR’s

14 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2 administration in response to the widespread undersecretary of agriculture and wind and soil erosion, which required director of federal Extension; extensive interagency cooperation between Howard R. Tolley, chief of the BAE the USDA’s Soil Conservation Service, [Bureau of Agricultural Economics]; state, county, and other local agencies, and Lewis C. Gracy, premier land farmers (Williams, 2005). The shelterbelt planner, Bushrod W. Allin, top project integrated environmentalism and planning official; and Carl C. Taylor, conservation concepts frequently used in leading rural sociologist. (Gilbert, forestry with novel farming practices and 2015, p. 13) traditional approaches that reduced water, soil, and wind erosion, such as planting “Half organic intellectual and half windrows (Lal et al., 2007). During this low modernist as the agrarian intellectuals period, the Soil Conservation Act of 1935 were, the tradition they created was short- (P. L. 74-46) established the Soil lived” (Stock & Johnston, 2001, p. 238). Conservation Service, renamed the Natural Many agriculturally focused New Dealers, Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) in however, pursued international careers 1994, as a permanent agency within the following the end of WWII (Gilbert, 2015). USDA (Lal et al., 2007). As a consequence, For example, Tolley served as chief USDA managers explored ways to extend economist to the United Nations Food and conservation assistance to farmers for the Agriculture Organization (Gilbert, 2015), first time (“A Brief History,” 2018; Lal et and others demonstrated an IAD focus al., 2007). earlier in their careers. According to Gilbert In 1938, Dr. M. L. Wilson, director (2015), “Henry Wallace always stood as an of federal Extension in the USDA, visited internationalist” (p. 259). He added: “As the Macedonian Project in Greece (Allen, vice president during most of America’s 1953). He observed the NEF had participation in World War II, he took it as successfully adapted the methods of U.S. his mission to internationalize the New county agents and other extension personnel Deal, . . . [while Dr. Wilson] pushed the to a culture very different from that of the globalization of the 4-H youth program” United States (Curti, 1988). However, his (Gilbert, 2015, p. 259). Wallace began his tenure abroad did not begin there. In the late intellectual life as a “Jeffersonian and 1920s and early 1930s, the Soviets hired participant in the Country Life Movement. . select U.S. agriculturists to help establish . . His point of view, and that of his father improved farming systems in the Soviet and grandfather, Henry C. and ‘Uncle Union (Stock & Johnston, 2001). Among Henry’ Wallace, had been expressed, he those selected, Wilson traveled to the Soviet recalled, by Liberty Hyde Bailey” Union with highly detailed plans for (Kirkendall, 1997, para. 3). These agrarian establishing integrated farming systems New Dealers “ended their long careers (Stock & Johnston, 2001). Dr. Wilson abroad, working on land reform, rural belonged to an elite group of agrarian development, and community development intellectuals, including five economists and projects in places far removed from their a sociologist, “who led the USDA during the native Midwest” (Gilbert, 2015, p. xv), New Deal” (Gilbert, 2015, p. 13): including, in some cases, countries with government’s more receptive to their Henry A. Wallace, secretary of pragmatic approaches to participatory rural agriculture; M. L. Wilson, development.

15 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2

As U.S. president, FDR had a resources” (Jundt, 2014, p. 44). This was not reputation for reorganizing governmental the only initiative in regard to the United operations with the intention of increasing States’ forthcoming role in integrating their efficiency (Olson, 2001). The conservation and sustainability concepts in Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1939 (53 Stat. its IAD efforts. Inspired by the success of 1431) instigated the regrouping of federal the NEF, as observed by M. L. Wilson in agencies to reduce costs and eliminate Greece (Allen, 1953), the Truman duplicitous programs (Roosevelt, 1939, administration received approval from para. 4). One result was the brief disbanding Congress in 1947 to offer technical of the FAS and renaming it The Office of assistance to Turkey and Greece (USAID, Foreign Agricultural Relations [OFAR] 1999). Paterson (1972) noted the “Truman (ACVAFS, 1953). OFAR “[provided] Doctrine[’s] assistance to Greece and technical knowledge and personnel, on a Turkey was part of America’s postwar governmental level” (ACVAFS, 1953, p. economic offensive” (p. 119) in regard to 21). During this period, U.S. IAD policies mitigating the rise of communism. were heavily reliant on national economic In a speech at Harvard University, goals (McCalla, 1969), i.e., “imports of Truman’s Secretary of State George C. strategic raw materials,” and less, as some Marshall proposed an outline for the critics have argued, on offering technical European Recovery Plan, better known as assistance to developing nations (Paterson, the Marshall Plan (McCalla, 1969; USAID, 1972, p. 126). Gifford Pinchot, first chief of 1999). The 4-year Marshall Plan was the U.S. Forest Service and an early authorized by the Foreign Assistance Act of champion of international conservation 1948, which established the Economic efforts, held correspondence with the Cooperation Agency [ECA] (USAID, 1999). president (Miller, 2013). In his September 8, McCalla (1969) concluded the United States 1944 letter, Pinchot urged FDR to convene a seemed ready to assume the mantle of world global summit on conservation with the leadership at the end of World War II, and United Nations (Miller, 2013). This was not further stated: “The postwar period was the first time Pinchot had pushed for this marked by efforts led by the United States to kind of international conference. As early as reconstruct Europe and to rationalize 1909, he made his original request to international trade” (p. 337). President Theodore Roosevelt, but President To that aim, President Truman William Howard Taft put an end to such an announced during his January 20, 1949 initiative on his ascension to office (Jundt, inaugural address: 2014). FDR died in the final year of WWII, and his successor, Harry S. Truman, became [C]ontinued support of the United president on April 12, 1945. Nations, the Marshall Plan, and After attempting to convene a global military agreements such as the summit on conservation with three different North Atlantic Treaty Organization U.S. presidents, Pinchot finally succeeded (NATO) and the Rio Pact. [And] when he presented his plan to President [w]ith relish, he moved beyond these Truman (Jundt, 2014). “In 1946, at the three points to announce a fourth behest of President Truman, the United point, a ‘bold new program’ of Nations (UN) announced that it would hold technical assistance to a conference to consider the conservation ‘underdeveloped’ areas [of the and effective utilization of natural world]. (Paterson, 1972, p. 120)

16 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2

200), i.e., an allusion to the forthcoming As a result, the Point 4 Program was Peace Corps. established in May of 1950 as Title IV of the During the period after Foreign Economic Assistance Act (Paterson, Representative Kennedy’s speech, the 1972). Its objective was to approach Mutual Security Act abolished the ECA and international development not through aid replaced it with the Mutual Security Agency alone, but rather by facilitating technical (MSA), which launched major U.S. foreign assistance and private investment (Paterson, assistance programs (Morgner, 1967). The 1972). Some observers, however, took a agency’s main goal was to empower contrarian viewpoint and saw the program as developing countries while containing the a “[m]eans for the United States to manage spread of communism by providing the postcolonial world while keeping less technical foreign assistance, including developed countries out of the Soviet military and economic support (Morgner, [Union’s] fold” (Jundt, 2014, p. 47). 1967). To assess the impact and efficacy of Moreover, “[i]n this neocolonial system the U.S. foreign assistance programs, the United States sold former colonies the ACVAFS published a study made possible American way of modern industrial and by support from the Ford Foundation. The consumer life while collecting payment in council’s report assessed The Role of the form of their natural resources” (Jundt, Voluntary Agencies in Technical Assistance, 2014, p. 47). Nevertheless, the Technical which stated: “[T]echnical aid proposed by Cooperation Administration (TCA) was government and intergovernmental groups established within the U.S. Department of must of course extend far beyond the State to implement the Point 4 Program limitations of non-tax supported agencies” (Erb, 1985). (ACVAFS, 1953, p. vii). The Point 4 Program was a series of In one of Dwight D. Eisenhower’s bilateral agreements and contracts pertaining first acts as president in 1953, he renamed to “agriculture and rural programs” the Point 4 Program the Technical (ACVAFS, 1953, p. 33) between non- Assistance Program, and reorganized the governmental organizations, foreign TCA and MSA into the Foreign Operations governments, and the U.S. government Administration (FOA) to harmonize their (ACVAFS, 1953). Henry G. Bennett, the efforts (USAID, 1999). Later, in 1955, the first TCA administrator, led the Point 4 International Cooperation Administration Program; Bennett also served as president of (ICA) replaced the FOA (Morgner, 1967). Oklahoma A&M College, now Oklahoma Even though USDA’s technical agricultural State University (Clark, Davis, & Simon, expertise was in high demand in many 2008), a land-grant institution. LDCs at that time (USAID, 1999), two Unfortunately, Bennett died in an airplane studies were implemented by the Foreign crash in Iran while on assignment for the Relations Committee of the U.S. Senate to Program (Clark et al., 2008). The mission assess the nation’s international and vision of the Point 4 Program persisted, development efforts due to increasing however, and in 1951 then U.S. pressure from the legislators’ constituents: Representative John F. Kennedy suggested Administrative Aspects of the U.S. Foreign “[y]oung college graduates would find a full Assistance Programs and Agricultural life in bringing technical advice and Surplus Disposal and Foreign Aid (USAID, assistance to the underprivileged and 1999). Findings of the two studies stoked backward Middle East” (Maier, 2009, p. political uncertainties regarding further

17 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2 adherence to the international development understanding better the origins and framework manifested by the Marshall Plan precursors of U.S. technical agricultural (USAID, 1999). development assistance to other nations To “expand and unify American aid includes the need to examine the actors and operations and strengthen the economic philosophical influences that manifested its development component” (Morgner, 1967, emergence, evolution, and status. p. 66), major policy reforms occurred in U.S. aid agencies offering technical Research Question #2: What agricultural expertise to LDCs (Morgner, philosophical forces, including 1967) during the 1960s. In 1961, President historically significant actors, John F. Kennedy launched the United States influenced the U.S. government’s Peace Corps, and the ICA was renamed the approach to offering technical United States Agency for International agricultural assistance in Development (USAID), as arranged under its international development efforts? the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 By examining the individuals (Morgner, 1967). The reorganization responsible for developing the notion of occurred because of increased dissatisfaction conservation of natural resources in the with the existing foreign aid program, and it United States, including the intersection of combined already existing U.S. assistance anthropocentrism, i.e., dominated by efforts abroad (Morgner, 1967). Moreover, humankind, and its antithesis, in 1959, the economist Walt Whitman nonanthropocentrism, their influence on Rostow published his economic model traditional agricultural practices becomes Rostow’s Stages of Economic Growth. The observable (Minteer, 2006), especially model posited that economic growth occurs differing philosophical positions. In the in five basic stages, including traditional decades after the USDA’s incorporation into society, preconditions for take-off, take-off, the presidential cabinet in 1889, two drive to maturity, and age of high mass preeminent environmental ethicists and consumption (Rostow, 1959). This longtime allies experienced a philosophical “economic development theory . . . provided schism (Williams, 2005). Gifford Pinchot, the premise for much of the development first chief of the U.S. Forest Service and planning in the . . . U.S. Agency for credited with establishing the definition for International Development” (USAID, 1999, conservation of natural resources, and John para. 16). The approach was not without Muir. Muir was founder of the Sierra Club, a critics; for example, pushback arose against naturalist, an eloquent spokesperson for the the position held by USAID and endorsed environmental movement, and author of by the Washington Consensus on many articles in national publications on Agriculture, i.e., a growing point of view nature (Williams, 2005). casting international aid as a business (Kydd Considered leaders of the United & Dorward, 2001). States’ nascent environmental movement, Nonetheless, USAID is the modern Pinchot and Muir fomented the notion that standard for international and differences existed in American intergovernmental cooperation through its conservation. Further, they argued the development projects and humanitarian aid, movement could be conceptualized as two relief, and recovery programs (USAID, distinct camps: conservationists and 1999), including efforts devoted to preservationists (Minteer, 2006). Pinchot agricultural development. However, and Muir are largely credited with creating

18 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2 the dialogue on how we as a nation should conservationist (and Mumford’s manage and preserve our natural resources RPAA colleague) who proposed the (Minteer, 2006). Their relationships with Appalachian Trail in the 1920s; and, Presidents, both Muir and Pinchot with finally, Aldo Leopold, the forester- Theodore Roosevelt and in regard to FDR philosopher and author of the and Harry Truman only Pinchot, influenced environmentalist classic A Sand the passage of significant federal legislation County Almanac. (Minteer, 2006, p. protecting and preserving natural resources 2) in the United States (Minteer, 2006). Such impact included formation of the Soil The third-way tradition offered an Conservation Service and other agencies integrated and progressive view on land within the USDA (Minteer, 2006). For stewardship, traditional U.S. production example, the CCC was modeled after work agriculture, and the intersection between camps established by Pinchot in human ideals, interests, and non-material Pennsylvania “in an attempt to relieve values. Beeman (1994) acknowledged unemployment” (Pinchot, 1998, p. xv) Bailey and Leopold as major contributors to during the Great Depression. the third-way tradition, better known to Bailey as the Nature Study Movement Other Historically Significant Actors (Connors, 2012). Jane Addams of Hull Minteer (2006), however, noted the House also held similar views on using competing narratives created by agriculture as an avenue for achieving social conservationist Gifford Pinchot and justice. Further, Beeman (1994) identified preservationist John Muir were Edward Faulkner as a catalyst for this oversimplifications of the rich and moral movement, and cited him as an antagonist tradition of environmental thinking in the for many scholars and practitioners of the United States. In his book, The Landscape of period. His approach, however, was rejected Reform: Civic Pragmatism and because Environmental Thought in America, Minteer (2006) suggested the existence of a “third . . . doing the opposite of what way tradition to the intellectual landscape of Faulkner preached was easier, more American environmentalism, a philosophical economical in the short-term, and path that has been almost completely was supported by the agricultural obscured . . .” (p. 2). He perceived this path establishment, including the land- to environmentalism was advanced by grant college scientists, the experiment stations, the Farm Liberty Hyde Bailey, a horticultural Bureau, the USDA, and especially scientist and rural reformer who was those vested interests in agribusiness a leading figure in the agrarian wing who had little to gain from the of Theodore Roosevelt’s wholesale rejection of agricultural conservation movement; Lewis chemicals. (Beeman, 1994, p. 99) Mumford, an urban theorist, cultural critic, and regional planner-thinker Nevertheless, Beeman (1994) concluded active in the Regional Planning Faulkner’s message was well-received by Association of America (RPAA) Hugh H. Bennett, the father of soil during the interwar period; Benton conservation and first head of the U.S. Soil MacKaye, a forester and Conservation Service (Nelson, 1997).

19 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2

Foor and Connors (2010) examined group (Ellsworth, 1960). Bailey relented and the historical backgrounds and impacts of accepted the appointment after Roosevelt several early agricultural educators, appealed to him with a “mixture of praise including Liberty Hyde Bailey. Moreover, and reproach” (Ellsworth, 1960, p. 162). as Connors (2012) pointed out, researchers Roosevelt admonished Bailey’s refusal and and practitioners should revisit Bailey’s idea said that he “would not have created the of nature study. He recommended Bailey be commission unless he had assumed that “remembered along with other noted Bailey would accept the chairmanship; that individuals, as one of the pioneers of Bailey’s refusal would jeopardize the agricultural education” (p. 51). Peters (2006) greatest opportunity which had yet presented concluded Bailey viewed agriculture as a itself to influence country life conditions . . means for awakening farmers during the .” (Ellsworth, 1960, p. 162). Other formative years of Cooperative Extension. commission members included Kenyon Speaking to Bailey’s vision, Peters (2006) Butterfield, Walter H. Page, Pinchot, and wrote: “[T]he main purpose of awakening “Uncle Henry” Wallace (Connors, 2012; farmers to this point of view was not to Peters & Morgan, 2004), Henry A. develop a more efficient, productive, and Wallace’s grandfather and editor of profitable agriculture, but to advance the Wallace’s Farmer (Shoemaker, 2010). larger cultural ideals of a ‘self-sustaining’ Ellsworth (1960) further noted: agriculture and personal happiness” (p. 190). “Bailey and Pinchot proved to be To this point, we assert recognition of Roosevelt’s most influential advisors in Bailey’s influence should be extended agricultural matters” (p. 157). The Report of further and credit him with laying much of the Country Life Commission, as authored the philosophical foundation of the modern by Bailey and colleagues, showed the third-way environmentalism movement, “general condition of farming life in the which, in no small part, presaged the early open country, and point[ed] out its larger approaches imbued in the U.S. problems” (Commission on Country Life, government’s aims regarding IAD for 1911, p. 3), but such was met with LDCs. ambivalence from some stakeholders (Ellsworth, 1960). However, despite the Historically Significant Events indifference of some, the commission’s It was Bailey’s Nature Study report ultimately provided stimulus for Movement that garnered the attention of passage of the Smith-Lever Act (Ellsworth, Gifford Pinchot and President Theodore 1960). Roosevelt (Ellsworth, 1960). Pinchot and Sir The Smith-Lever Act of 1914 was Horace Plunkett, Theodore Roosevelt’s premised on the need to fund a Cooperative second tutor on agriculture and founder of Extension Service (CES) with the purpose to the Irish Agricultural Organisation Society, diffuse “among the people of the United “created the memorable, working States useful and practical information, on partnership of the colorful Roosevelt and the subjects relating to agriculture and home talented Bailey” (Ellsworth, 1960, p. 159). economics, and to encourage application of Bailey was eventually appointed by the same” (Pope, 1958, p. 270). The CES Roosevelt as chairman of the Commission has long embraced the strategy in which on Country Life (Peters & Morgan, 2004) at programming matched the needs of its the behest of Pinchot after Bailey had beneficiaries. Other initiatives to improve initially rejected an invitation to chair the rural life were realized in 1919 with creation

20 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2 of the Division of Farm Population and study for school children and an argument Rural Life, and emergence of the National for its significance in creating an Country Life Association (Ellsworth, 1960). environmental ethic among country Moreover, “[r]ural sociology became a dwellers, especially farmers” (Minteer, separate and thriving academic discipline as 2006, p. 21). a result of the prestige given to it by the Country Life Commission” (Ellsworth, Discussion and Conclusions 1960, p. 172). The U.S. approach to IAD was Bailey’s point of view makes it modeled after the work of organizations difficult to cast him in one philosophical such as the NEF (“History,” 2016). Gifford tradition over another. Bailey (1893) wrote: Pinchot, first head of the U.S. Forest Service and a confidant to several U.S. presidents, I am not pleading for mere numbers led a decades-long crusade to globalize of students; of those we shall have conservation and introduce an international enough. But I am urging those audience to the use of natural resources as principles which, more than any guided by sustainable and economically other movement, must carry the viable practices. The Shelterbelt Project of university mission and influence to 1934 was the first evidence of interagency the homes of the people. I am cooperation and the use of multidisciplinary pleading for the education of the teams to integrate environmentalism and farmer in those special occupations traditional agriculture concepts in the United which the major part of our States (Williams, 2005). Moreover, key population must always follow, and political and governmental figures not alone because it makes him a advocated for legislation promulgating IAD better farmer, but because, as well, it by agencies of the U.S. Government makes him a better citizen. All (Gilbert, 2015). prosperity rests ultimately upon the Minteer (2006) proposed that a third- land, and no higher institution of way tradition was embodied within learning can serve the best interests American environmentalism. He concluded of philanthropy and patriotism until the third-way tradition was advanced by it plants itself firmly in the soil Liberty Hyde Bailey, Aldo Leopold, Lewis which gave it birth! (p. 12) Mumford, and Benton MacKaye, among other proponents. Bailey initially declined a Minteer (2006) referred to Bailey as an position with the Country Life Commission, idealist and a pragmatist – a man who and if not for Theodore Roosevelt’s, transcended philosophical boundaries and Pinchot’s, and Plunkett’s efforts to secure concerned with the nexus of “intellectual, his leadership as its chair, the commission’s aesthetic, and social character of rural life” success was considered uncertain (p. 21). Such appears compatible with the (Ellsworth, 1960). Beeman (1994) also third-way tradition as a strand within alluded to the existence of a third-way to environmentalism that should not be deemed modern environmentalism, i.e., the precepts entirely anthropocentric or for a paradigm of sustainable agriculture nonanthropocentric, preservationist or practices, which were often diffused as part conservationist, nor aesthetic or utilitarian of U.S. IAD efforts. Based on his work with (Minteer, 2006). These dispositions were sustainable agriculture and the traditional manifested by Bailey’s “promotion of nature American agriculture paradigm, Beeman

21 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2

(1994) concluded Edward Faulkner, in federal authority should decentralize to addition to Bailey, Lewis, Leopold, and citizens. They sought both to merge science MacKaye, was responsible for popularizing with citizen knowledge and to integrate the notion of sustainability and conservation, government action with local participation” including select preservationist concepts, (Gilbert, 2015, p. 21). It is likely Dewey among the general U.S. populace. Aspects would have supported such an approach to of this philosophy were manifested during governance, including the stewardship of the New Deal and led by champions that natural resources. Their philosophy, Gilbert (2015) described as agrarian however, failed to promulgate in rural intellectuals. Although their influence was America to the extent they had hoped it short-lived domestically, many of these would (Gilbert, 2015). Nevertheless, the individuals migrated to working in agrarian New Dealers did take aspects of international settings, including early post- their third-way tradition of decentralized, World War II projects featuring agriculture participatory rural development abroad: and rural development (Gilbert, 2015). Their “[L]ocal social change bore fruit globally efforts presaged the U.S. Government-led before coming home to help shape major initiatives that would become USAID social reforms in poor rural and urban (Gilbert, 2015). neighborhoods throughout the United In regard to participatory-democratic States” (Gilbert, 2015, p. 260). culture, the American education philosopher In addition, the crucial role of and reformer, John Dewey, (1939) stated: indigenous knowledge in the U.S. approach “An immense difference divides the planned to domestic and IAD efforts should not be society from a continuously planning understated. For example, the issue of society” (p. 321). In what he called the equality (Rogers, 2003), in both formal and Great Community, Dewey asserted that non-formal teaching and learning “practical experience and experimentation in environments, is important domestically and problem solving could teach communities internationally. In international and societies how to become more development, agricultural extension agents democratic” (as cited in Gilbert, 2015, p. have a tendency to engage with farmers 256). The notions of civic pragmatism and more similar to themselves, i.e., the environmental ethics introduced significant principle of homophily and related implications imbuing the philosophical communication behaviors (Rogers, 2003). underpinnings of the U.S. approach to As a consequence, knowledge transfer providing agricultural technical expertise as between agents and farmers is likely to foreign assistance (Gilbert, 2015; Minteer, expand the knowledge gap between the 2006). These worldviews, however, also different groups comprising a social system, suggest a philosophical chasm that grew to especially those less similar to change be deeply embedded in the U.S. approach to agents and early adopters (Rogers, 2003). It environmentalism, including social, is prudent, therefore, that international political, economic, and cultural extension professionals are sensitive to the manifestations (Reid & Taylor, 2003) with potential pitfalls associated with widening ramifications for agriculture. Yet, we know inequalities stemming from adoption this to be only a partial account of the larger behaviors favoring the already advantaged phenomenon. To that end, agrarian New in a society (Rogers, 2003). Dealers “believed that expertise must join Moreover, in developing countries, with the local knowledge of farmers and that these systems are often only linked to

22 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2 national governments instead of coordinated with it, at least, regarding agrarian reforms with and implemented through decentralized (Gilbert, 2015). As such, partners in U.S. agencies, as organized in the United States IAD efforts ought to learn from past (Swanson & Claar, 1984). In describing the mistakes while emphasizing the value of national agricultural extension systems local knowledge and the exchange of (NAES) of such nations, Swanson (2006) information and ideas among wrote: extension/advisory service providers, other educators, researchers, and host-country In examining trends to date, it seems nationals through participatory-democratic clear that public agricultural research collaborations. Navarro (2008) called such and extension systems cannot efforts the co-creation of knowledge by and compete effectively with major for agricultural extension agents, multi-national life-science researchers, and farmers such that we move companies that are supplying large- “toward a vision of agricultural extension as scale commercial farmers with an interactive and integrative model of highly productive, proprietary shared knowledge and joint discovery” (p. technologies. If national extension 75). Such practice could address the leaders continue to pursue this admonitions of Rogers (2003) and others strategy, these national extension regarding pro-innovation bias and issues of systems will likely follow the pattern equality that so often accompany the of agricultural extension systems in introduction of new technologies and Europe, North America and Oceania, practices, including those having either in being progressively significance for the agricultural sector. downsized or disbanded altogether. (p. 15) Implications and Recommendations A number of countries have Most NAES in developing countries developed deeply rooted and philosophically perpetuate the notion that adoption of moored environmental traditions and, in sustainable agriculture techniques and many cases, adopted principles espoused by modern technology will increase yields (Van the U.S. Government and other nations’ den Ban & Hawkins, 1996), i.e., practices development agencies (Minteer, 2006). This diffused commonly in more developed study shone some light on the philosophical nations such as the United States. As a foundations of agricultural and extension counterfactual, a move toward participatory, education in regard to IAD, with a view decentralized extension systems has been toward influencing contemporary policies successful in China and India (Swanson, intertwining with environmentalism and 2006). In participatory extension, “[t]he traditional agricultural production practices focus is less on what we learn, and more on in the United States and abroad (Brosnan, how we learn and with whom” (Röling & 2007). We recommend strengthening cross- Pretty, 1997, para. 27). cultural understanding and communication In the United States, the social between academic traditions and with global science tradition of participatory- partners by contextualizing environmental democratic, rural agrarian reform had a brief and agricultural ethics within their historical, life span (Gilbert, 2015). This aspect of the intellectual, and geographical settings while New Deal was defeated by old-fashioned “deemphasiz[ing] the most radical aspects” power politics, and many of its ideals ended (Chamberlain, 2010, p. 90) of

23 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2

Environmentalism ideology. Instead, we American Council of Voluntary Agencies urge development specialists to embrace the for Foreign Service (ACVAFS). earlier version, i.e., Bailey’s Nature Study (1953). The role of voluntary Movement (Connors, 2012), and later agencies in technical assistance: [A understood as the third-way tradition taken reference volume on technical abroad by Gilbert’s (2015) agrarian assistance programs with particular intellectuals. emphasis on the work and The actors illuminated in this study responsibilities of voluntary that argued philosophical perspectives on agencies. Based on a study participatory development and conservation sponsored by the American Council of natural resources while calling for of Voluntary Agencies for Foreign sustainable use of the same should be Service, inc., through its Committee studied by all students in colleges of on Technical Assistance and agriculture. For example, Pinchot’s works Projects, New York, NY.] Retrieved on conservation ethic and Leopold’s from writings concerning land ethic have long https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id= been studied and recognized in the field of mdp.39015063777778;view=1up;seq forestry; however, they are not as well =7 known in other allied disciplines, including Bailey, L. H. (1893). Agricultural education agricultural and extension education. It is and its place in the university also important for these concepts to curriculum. Ithaca, NY: Andrus & complement the more sustainable traditions Church. Retrieved from of production agriculture in the United https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/bits States. We further recommend exploring tream/handle/2152/25663/05917166 foreign influences on American agriculture 0753701.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowe and environmentalism, including their d=y philosophical primers. In addition, attention Beeman, R. (1994). The trash farmer: and clarity concerning high and low Edward Faulkner and the origins of modernism as well as the relation of such to sustainable agriculture in the United agriculture and an educated citizenry is States, 1943-1953. Journal of warranted, including the period following Sustainable Agriculture, 4(1), 91- the New Deal era and the technocratization 102. doi:10.1300/J064v04n01_07 of federal agencies advising and regulating Brosnan, K. A. (2007). [Review of the book U.S. agriculture. Inquiries could include the The landscape of reform: Civic period beginning with the Green Revolution pragmatism and environmental and move forward to more recent thought in America by B. A. approaches to IAD and the longstanding Minteer]. The American Historical involvement of U.S. agricultural and Review, 112(3), 864-864. extension educators. doi:10.1086/ahr.112.3.864 Camp, W. G., & Crunkilton, J. R. (1985). References History of agricultural education in Allen, H. B. (1953). Rural reconstruction in America: The great individuals and action: Experience in the Near East events. Journal of the American and Middle East. New York, NY: Association of Teacher Educators in Cornell University Press. Agriculture, 26(1), 57-63. doi:10.5032/jaatea.1985.01057

24 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2

Chamberlain, D. M. (2010). [Review of the Education, 51(3) 23-31. doi:10. book The landscape of reform: Civic 5032/jae.2010.03023 pragmatism and environmental Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS). (2015). thought in America, by B. A. U.S. Department of Agriculture Minteer]. Environmental Foreign Agricultural Service Practice, 12(01), 90-91. Strategic Plan: FY 2015-2018. doi:10.1017/S1466046609990536 Retrieved from Clark, D., Davis, J., & Simon, S. (2008). https://www.fas.usda.gov/sites/defau Henry G. Bennett papers, Truman lt/files/2015- Library. Retrieved from 07/administaror_approved_fas_2015 http://www.trumanlibrary.org/hstpap -2018_strategic_plan_150128.pdf er/bennett.htm Fraser, S., & Gerstle, G. (1989). The rise Commission on Country Life. (1911). and fall of the New Deal order, Report of the commission on country 1930-1980. Princeton, NJ: Princeton life. New York, NY: Sturgis and University Press. Walton Company. Gilbert, J. (2015). Planning democracy: Connors, J. J. (2012). Liberty Hyde Bailey: Agrarian intellectuals and the Agricultural educator and intended New Deal. Danbury, CT: philosopher. NACTA Journal, 56(4), Yale University Press. 44-51. Retrieved from History. (2016, September 12). Retrieved http://search.proquest.com/docview/ from http://www.neareast.org/who- 1268138493 we-are/ /fulltextPDF/1C7BE5B6914A4D51P Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2010). Q/1?accountid=4117 Educational research: Quantitative, Curti, M. (1988). American philanthropy qualitative, and mixed approaches abroad. New Brunswick, NJ: (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Transaction Publishers. Publications. Dewey, J. (1939). The economic basis of a Jundt, T. (2014). Dueling visions for the new society. In L. A. Boydston (Ed.), postwar world: The UN and The later works of John Dewey (13), UNESCO 1949 conferences on 309-322. Carbondale: Southern resources and nature, and the origins Illinois University Press. of environmentalism. Journal of Ellsworth, C. S. (1960). Theodore American History, 101(1), 44-70. Roosevelt’s Country Life doi:10.1093/jahist/jau246 Commission. Agricultural History, Kirkendall, R. S. (1997, March 13). Second 34(4), 155-172. Retrieved from thoughts on the agricultural http://www.jstor.org/stable/3741109 revolution: Henry A. Wallace in his Erb, C. C. (1985). Prelude to point four: The last years. Greenbelt, MD: Henry A. Institute of Inter-American Wallace Institute for Alternative Affairs. Diplomatic History, 9(3), Agriculture. Retrieved from 249-269. doi:10.1111/j.1467- http://www1.american.edu/epiphany/ 7709.1985.tb00535.x WL97.htm Foor, R. M., & Connors, J. J. (2010). Kydd, J., & Dorward, A. (2001). The Pioneers in an emerging field: Who Washington consensus on poor were the early agricultural country agriculture: Analysis, educators? Journal of Agricultural prescription and institutional

25 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2

gaps. Development Policy Retrieved from Review, 19(4), 467-478. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/porta doi:10.1111/1467-7679.00145 l/nrcs/detail/national/about/ history Lal, R., Reicosky, D. C., & Hanson, J. D. /?cid=nrcs143_021392 (2007). Evolution of the plow over Morgner, A. (1967). The American foreign 10,000 years and the rationale for aid program: Costs, no-till farming. Soil and Tillage accomplishments, alternatives? The Research, 93(1), 1-12. Review of Politics, 29(01), 65-75. doi:10.1016/j.still.2006.11.004 Retrieved from Maher, N. M. (2007). Natures New Deal: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1405813 The Civilian Conservation Corps Navarro, M. (2008). On the path to and the roots of the American sustainable agricultural development: environmental movement. Oxford Enhancing extension agents’ University Press, USA. contribution. The International Maier, T. (2009). The Kennedys: America's Journal of Environmental, Cultural, emerald kings: A five-generation Economic and Social Sustainability, history of the ultimate Irish-Catholic 4(3), 71-78. family. New York, NY: Basic Books. Nelson, P. J. (1997). To hold the land: Soil McCalla, A. F. (1969). Protectionism in erosion, agricultural scientists, and international agricultural trade, 1850- the development of conservation 1968. Agricultural History, 43(3), tillage techniques. Agricultural 329-344. Retrieved from History, 71(1), 71-90. Retrieved http://www.jstor.org/stable/4617690 from McDowell, W. H. (2002). Historical http://www.jstor.org/stable/3744686 research: A guide. New York, NY: Olson, J. S. (2001). Historical dictionary of Longman. the Great Depression, 1929-1940. Miller, C. (2013). Gifford Pinchot and the Westport, CT: Greenwood making of modern environmentalism. Publishing Group. Washington, DC: Island Press. Paterson, T. G. (1972). Foreign aid under Minteer, B. A. (2006). The landscape of wraps: The point four program. The reform: Civic pragmatism and Wisconsin Magazine of History, 119- environmental thought in America. 126. Retrieved from Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4634774 Minteer, B. A., & Pyne, S. J. (2013). Peters, S. J. (2006). Every farmer should be Restoring the narrative of American awakened: Liberty Hyde Bailey’s environmentalism. Restoration vision of agricultural extension Ecology, 21(1), 6-11. work. Agricultural History, doi:10.1111/j.1526- 80(2),190-219. Retrieved from 100X.2012.00909.x http://argo.library.okstate.edu/login? National Resources Conservation Service url=https://search-proquest- (NRCS). (2016, September 13). com.argo.library.okstate.edu/docvie More than 80 Years of helping w/198218355?accountid=4117 people help the land: A brief history Peters, S. J., & Morgan, P. A. (2004). The of NRCS. Natural Resources Country Life Commission: Conservation Service, United States Reconsidering a milestone in Department of Agriculture. American agricultural history.

26 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2

Agricultural History, 78(3), 289-316. Peters & J. T. Woolley, The Retrieved from American Presidency Project. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/374 Retrieved from 4708.pdf http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/ Pinchot, G. (1998). Breaking new ground. ?pid=15760 Washington, DC: Island Press. Rostow, W. W. (1959). The stages of Pope, E. V. (1958). Extension service economic growth. The Economic programs affecting American History Review, 12(1), 1-16. families. Marriage and Family doi:10.1111/j.1468- Living, 270-277. doi:10.2307/348465 0289.1959.tb01829.x Rasmussen, W. D. (1989). Taking the Schubert, S. D., Suarez, M. J., Pegion, P. J., university to the people: Seventy-five Koster, R. D., & Bacmeister, J. T. years of cooperative extension. (2004). On the cause of the 1930s Ames: Iowa State University Press. Dust Bowl. Science, 303(5665), Reid, H. G., & Taylor, B. (2003). John 1855-1859. Dewey's aesthetic ecology of public doi:10.1126/science.1095048 intelligence and the grounding of Shoemaker, A. R. (2010). The beginnings of civic environmentalism. Ethics & the agricultural education in Midwestern Environment, 8(1), 74-92. Retrieved rural schools, 1895-1915. Graduate from Theses and Dissertations. (Paper http://www.jstor.org/stable/4033905 11437) Retrieved from 3. http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/11437 Roberts, R., & Edwards, M. C. (2015). Stock, C. M., & Johnston, R. D. (2001). The Service-learning’s ongoing journey countryside in the age of the modern as a method of instruction: state: Political histories of rural Implications for school-based, America. Ithaca, NY: Cornell agricultural education. Journal of University Press. Agricultural Education, 56(2), 217- Swanson, B. E. (2006). The changing role of 233. doi:10.5032/jae.2015.02217 agricultural extension in a global Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of economy. Urbana, 51, 61801. innovations (5th ed.). New York, doi:10.5191/jiaee.2006.13301 NY: Free Press. Swanson, B. E., & Claar, B. J. (1984). The Röling, N., & Pretty, J. N. (1997). history and development of Extension’s role in sustainable agricultural extension. In B. E. agricultural development. In B.E. Swanson (Ed.). Agricultural Swanson, R. P. Bentz, & A. J. extension: A reference manual (2nd Sofranko (Eds.), Improving ed.). Rome, Italy: Food and agricultural extension: A reference Agriculture Organization. manual (chap. 20). Rome, Italy: Tarnoff, C. & Lawson, M. L. (2016). Food and Agriculture Organization. Foreign Aid: An introduction to U.S. Retrieved from programs and policy. Congressional http://www.fao.org/docrep/w5830e/ Research Service Report R40213. w5830e00.htm#Contents Washington, DC: USPGO. Retrieved Roosevelt, F. D. (1939). Message to from Congress on plan II to implement the https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R40213.p reorganization act. Online by G. df

27 Journal of International Agricultural and Extension Education Volume 25, Issue 2

Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/Pnacg5 Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent 28.pdf qualitative research. Qualitative Urban, W. J., & Wagoner, J. L., Jr. (2014). Inquiry, 16(10), 837-851. American education: A history. doi:10.1177/1077800410383121 Lewiston, NY: Routledge. United Nations (UN). (2017). Least Van den Ban, A. W., & Hawkins, H. S. developed countries. Retrieved from (1996). Agricultural extension (2nd https://www.un.org/development/des ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell a/dpad/least-developed-country- Science. category.html Williams, G. W. (2005). The USDA Forest United States Agency for International Service - The first century. Development (USAID). (1999). A Washington, DC: USDA, Forest brief history of foreign assistance. Service, Office of Communication. Retrieved from Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/1957/47272

28