0 .. DOCUMENT RESUME ED 151 130 RCROO393 AUTHOR RogerS,'Everett M.; And Others TITLE Extending the Agricultural ExtensionModel. Preliminary Draft. INSTITUTION Stanford Uniied, Calif. Inst. for Communication Research. SPONS AGENCY National Science Foundation, Washington,D.C. PUB DATE Sep 76- NOTE . 187p. '\ BURS PRICE MF-$0.83 HC-$10.03 Plus Postage., e' DESCRIPTORS *Agencies; Agriculture; *Delivery Systems; *DevelOping Nations; Evaluation; *FamilyPlanning; History; Industry; *Models; Rural Development;*Rural Extension; Technology IDENTIFIERS -*Agricultural Extension Model . ABSTRACT The purposes of this reportare: to describe the main elements of the U.S. agricultural extensionmodel and its effects on the agricultural revolution; to analyzeattempts to extend this model to non-agricultural technology and/or toless developed countries; and to draw general conclusions about the diffusicnof technological innovations, with implications forresearch and action. The following main elements in the agricultural extensionmodel are identified: a critical mass of new technology;a .research sub-system oriented to utilization; a high degree ofuser control over the research, utilization process; structural linkagesamong the research utilization systems's components;a high degree of client contact by the linking sub-sytem;-a "spannable" socialdistance across each interface between components in thesystem; evolution as a complete system; and a high degree of control by thesystem over its environment. The analysis of model applicationto seven different cases (Social and Rehabilitation Service, Office of Education, National Diffusion Network Program, familyplanning, developing nations, and diffusion of technologyamong private manufacturing firms). indicates: little success with SRS applicationdue to the neglect of certain elements of .the model;more OE and SRS success; little success when transferred to agriculturalapplications in developing nations; greatest success with adaptationto the family planning context; and little success in industryapplidations of the model. (JC) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRSa:'e the best that can be made from the original document. * *1:********************************************************************* liminary - EXTENDING THE AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION MODEL by Everett M. Rogers, J.D. Eveland, and Alden S. Bean Stanford University, University of.Michigan, and the NatiouarScience Foundation Institute for Communication Research Stanford University IV) Stanford, California.94305 CO (: September, 1976 "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS r.4 MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY US DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. CI) EDUCATION & WELFARE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRO., DUCE° EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM TO THE,EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGIN- s ATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) AND STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY R EFFIE. USERS OF THE ERIC SYSTEM." SENT OFFICIAL NATIONAL INSTITUTF OF EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Portions of this report were prepared with the support of the National Science Foundation under Purchase Order 75-SP-0265. The findings, opinions, and conclusions expressed here-in are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official views of the National Science FOundation. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PREFACE AM. i INTRODUCTION 1 THE AGRICULTURI.L. EXTENSION MODEL 5 General Trends in Rural Life 6 Historical Development of the Cooperative Extension Service 15 Need for an Agri-Cnitural Extension Service 20 .Local Control and Needs-:Orientation 28 Rise of- -the State Extension Specialists ,30 Broadening the Subject-Matter of Extension 35 Process over-, Content , 38 Rise of the Aides 41 Criticism of Extension 43 The Effects of the Extension Services Overview and Summary 52 Conclusions!- 56' SOCIAL AND REHAKLITATION SERVICE (DHEW) EXPERIMENT . WITH RESEARCH'UTILIZATION SPECIALISTS 62 THE U.S. OFFICE OF EDUCATION EXPERIMENTS WITH EDUCATIONAL EXTENSION AGENTS 71 Educational Extension Agents 73 Comparison of the Educational Extension Agents wand the,RUS's 76 National Diffusion Network Program 81 AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION IR-DEVELOPING NATIONS 89. AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION APPLICATIONSTO FAMILY' PLANNING PROGRAMS 102 APPLICATIONS OF THE MODEL TO THE DIFFUSION OF TECHNOLOGY AMONG PRIVATE MANUFACTURING FIRMS 110 Office of State Technical,Services 111. :The NASA Te'chnology Uti.142ation Program 114 Some General Observations nn Extension in Private Business 116' 4 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS ABOUT-DIFFUSION FROM THE AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION MODEL COnclusi^ons 119 Implications for Action 121 Implications for Future Research 127 REFERENCES CITED 130 Appendix: TRENDS IN AGRICULTURE, RURAL LIFE, AND THE AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICES 134. 5 r. TREFACE In one sense, workon the present report began yearsago when one of the authots (Eve.rett. Rogers)was employed as a state Exten- sion specialist., a researcher in an Agricultural ExperimentSta- tion, and an administrator ina state Agricultural Extension Ser- . vice;Rogers' early research(in,-the,1950's and early 1960's) centered on .the diffusion ofagricultural innovations to farmers iff Iowa and Ohio, and especiallyon the role of Extensiciri-Tervice personnel in thisprocess.. The present.report reflects thisclose personal acquaintance with theagricultural extension model. Two agencies in the U,S. Departmentof'Health, Education and `Welfare (DHEW) initiated pilot.projects in-the late 1960's and early 1970's in which they triedout an adaptation of the agiicul:- tural extension model. One agency is the Social and Rehabilitation Service (SRS), which in 1969 launcheda pilo,t project inwhAch nine research utilization specialistswere employed to assist SRS of- ficials in putting research-basedinnovations into practice. A sister DHEW agency, the U.S. Office ofEducation (OE), launched a parallel pilot program of educationalextension agents in 1970. Dr. Rogers was a consultant to both theSRS and '0E pilot plojects, asthy attempted to adapt the agriculturalextension model, ,and extend it into these new applications. During the same period, J.D, Eveland w.asa program analyst with the U.S. Department of Health,Education and Welfare, and was extensively involved in the prOblems of relatingfederally-sponsored 6 ii research activities to federalprogram operations. He worked for a-year In the U.S, Office of Education, andwas. involved in a task force study conducted by the Office ofthe Sedretary on several aspects of the SRS His observations deriVed from his federalex- perience, and from the experiences of his colleaguesin both OE and SRS, help fOrm the basis of our.interpretation.ofthe, two HEW case analyses. Fortunately, both agencies' -pilot efforts in extending. the A). .agricultural extension model were subjected to thoroughevaluation, and the reports from these evaluation researchesare drawn upon in the present report as a guide to formulatingour conclusions. Two other main efforts to extend the agriculturalextension . model that are analyzed in this report, occurred inthe less de- veloped countries of Latin America, Africa, and Asia: One was the attempt to create agricultural extension services in thesecountries to reach peasant, farmers with technological innovationsin agricul- ture. Another, effort, aimed at a similar audience, is represented by national family planning programs., Both approaches have-been analyzed in various research-studies by Everett Rogers andhis colleagues over the pait decade in about a dozen countries. <, In a latter section of this report we discuss the applicabil- ity of the agricultural extension model to thecase of private. manufacturing firms. Here, Dr. Alden Bean has the most relevant 'experience, stemming from his.many years-of industrial marketing- work, his subsequent research at Northwestern Universition in- dustrial innovation, and his current position in the Division of Policy Research and Arialysis of the National Science Foundation, where he manages a program of, researchon technologi-dal innovation processes. A variety of federal government-sponsoredefforts have been. initiated in pastyears to apply the agricultural extension model to diffus'e technologicalinnovations to private manufac- turing firms in the United States. We review several of these progiams, and seek to drawconclusions about the applicability of the agricuftural extension model inthe industrial context' Stanford EMR Ann Arbor JDE Washington, D.C. .ASB September, 1976 -1- MENDING THE AGRICULTURAL 'EXTENSION MODEL by- Evetett M. Rogers, J.D. Eveland, and Alden S. Bean* INTRODUCTION The purposes of this reportare (1)-to describe the main, elements of the U.S. agriculturalextension model, and its ei- fecis-on the agricultural revolution,(2) to analyze attenits to extend this model to non-agricultural technology and /-orto less developed countries, and (3)to draw general conclusions, about the diffusion of technological'innovations,with implica- tions for research And action, The U.S. agricultural extension model is undoubtedly the Most widely-recognized system for the diffusion ofinnovations in the world. No other federal/state agency claims to be rela- tively mere successful in transferring technology. The agricul- .tural extension services of the U.S.are reputed to have been spectacularly successful in diffusing agricultural researchre- Sults- to farmers, and in thus raising their levels of agricul- tural productivity. Later in this report, we question