partnerships, or simply social relations. In other words, the development, dispersion
and utilization of innovations can be largely understood as a social process. For
example, it has been argued that relatively strong interaction between actors is
crucial, because tacit and informal elements of knowledge can be made explicit and
thus can be absorbed and shared (see, for example, Leeuwis 2004). Moreover, as
Schad et al. (2011) found within the framework of the Uplands Program, close
interaction also helps to reduce the uncertainty inherent in innovation processes.
Because marginalized people so often lag behind the development of societies
and repeatedly lose out on or fail to participate in innovation processes, the
appraisal of alternative innovation pathways needs to focus specifically on finding
new ways to make knowledge accessible and to enable its efficient dispersion and
application. Such alternative approaches should seek to link actors in the innovation
system with the interests of excluded communities, so that together they can help
to shift the distributional outcomes of innovation towards the needs of the poor.
Agricultural extension, or more broadly speaking rural advisory services, can make
a significant contribution to this development; therefore, against the background of
locally diverging contexts within the mountainous areas of Southeast Asia, the
potential role of well-designed advisory services in fostering rural and agricultural
development is self-explanatory, its aims being:
• To provide a ‘bridging-function’ between those innovations needed locally (‘the
demand side’) and the suppliers of such innovations
• To support farmers in making responsible choices which, from their point of
view, are optimal in terms of their given situation and, therefore, facilitate
behavioral changes in farmers that help with innovation adoption
• To act as a broker and network facilitator; to match actors in the innovation
system, and
• To act as an initiator of novel modes of learning and – during the course of this
help – to evaluate and improve farmers’ own opinion-forming and decisionmaking skills.
But to what extent does the Vietnamese agricultural knowledge system already
meet these requirements, or more specifically, what development processes geared
towards these functional requirements have been observed since the formation of
public extension services in the early 1990s? Also, how have the growing spaces
used for participation and demand articulation been operationalized? Moreover, and
building on our long-term observations of these processes, what new approaches
to extension or indeed modifications to the current approaches, need to be taken in
order to realize greater client-orientation?
To understand the current dynamics of the Vietnamese agricultural knowledge
and information system (AKIS), a brief journey through the recent history of the
economic, social and political system is required in order to explore the
government’s role in rural advisory work and its specific role in terms of agricultural
extension. We therefore preface our discussion with a sketch of the AKIS’ evolution
and its typical features. Accordingly, Sect. 11.2 will combine an historical perspective gained from the literature with a brief overview of the existing institutional and
operational context, as appraised during our field research.
11 Rethinking Knowledge Provision for the Marginalized: Rural Networks. . .
435
and utilization of innovations can be largely understood as a social process. For
example, it has been argued that relatively strong interaction between actors is
crucial, because tacit and informal elements of knowledge can be made explicit and
thus can be absorbed and shared (see, for example, Leeuwis 2004). Moreover, as
Schad et al. (2011) found within the framework of the Uplands Program, close
interaction also helps to reduce the uncertainty inherent in innovation processes.
Because marginalized people so often lag behind the development of societies
and repeatedly lose out on or fail to participate in innovation processes, the
appraisal of alternative innovation pathways needs to focus specifically on finding
new ways to make knowledge accessible and to enable its efficient dispersion and
application. Such alternative approaches should seek to link actors in the innovation
system with the interests of excluded communities, so that together they can help
to shift the distributional outcomes of innovation towards the needs of the poor.
Agricultural extension, or more broadly speaking rural advisory services, can make
a significant contribution to this development; therefore, against the background of
locally diverging contexts within the mountainous areas of Southeast Asia, the
potential role of well-designed advisory services in fostering rural and agricultural
development is self-explanatory, its aims being:
• To provide a ‘bridging-function’ between those innovations needed locally (‘the
demand side’) and the suppliers of such innovations
• To support farmers in making responsible choices which, from their point of
view, are optimal in terms of their given situation and, therefore, facilitate
behavioral changes in farmers that help with innovation adoption
• To act as a broker and network facilitator; to match actors in the innovation
system, and
• To act as an initiator of novel modes of learning and – during the course of this
help – to evaluate and improve farmers’ own opinion-forming and decisionmaking skills.
But to what extent does the Vietnamese agricultural knowledge system already
meet these requirements, or more specifically, what development processes geared
towards these functional requirements have been observed since the formation of
public extension services in the early 1990s? Also, how have the growing spaces
used for participation and demand articulation been operationalized? Moreover, and
building on our long-term observations of these processes, what new approaches
to extension or indeed modifications to the current approaches, need to be taken in
order to realize greater client-orientation?
To understand the current dynamics of the Vietnamese agricultural knowledge
and information system (AKIS), a brief journey through the recent history of the
economic, social and political system is required in order to explore the
government’s role in rural advisory work and its specific role in terms of agricultural
extension. We therefore preface our discussion with a sketch of the AKIS’ evolution
and its typical features. Accordingly, Sect. 11.2 will combine an historical perspective gained from the literature with a brief overview of the existing institutional and
operational context, as appraised during our field research.
11 Rethinking Knowledge Provision for the Marginalized: Rural Networks. . .
435