strong disseminators of information within the evolving market economy, turning
information into knowledge and action, and thereby adapting to local situations
and avoiding the pitfalls of centrally planned and locally unsuitable measures.
So seen from a distance, the three decrees shaping the reorganization and
evolution of the agricultural extension and knowledge system have witnessed an
ambitious and highly successful process, and it can be speculated that in 20 years or
so, extension might even reach the standards achieved in more developed states in
terms of decentralization, participation and pluralism, and in terms of being demand
driven, farmer-led and self-help oriented.
11.4 Technical Content Matters and Social Objectives?
Limitations of Novel Group Learning Approaches
in Vietnam
Group-based learning approaches can be an effective means of building farmer
competencies, as they engage people in the processes of experimentation and
development, therein providing space for mutual learning and improving analytical
skills (Schad 2012).
1 Moreover, as maybe the most important side-effect, they
support the evolution of networks and potentially foster recognition of input
suppliers, marketing outlets and knowledge providers. Rather than disseminating
centrally-designed extension messages, group-based learning approaches seek to be
responsive to local information needs and priorities.
Turning towards farmer-led and group-based learning approaches, a recent
publication from the International Food Policy Research Institute (Feder et al.
2010) mentioned group sustainability as a key challenge, given the fact that most
projects in this field are initiated and supported by outside donors (such as NGOs
and government agencies) and often do not manage to survive the critical period
just after the initiator halts engagement. With respect to Vietnam, where farmer-led
approaches to extension are still in their infancy, as discussed in the previous
sections, there is a pressing need to understand how pilot group-based learning
activities are organized and what might be improved, in order for them to become
sustainable once external funding support or subsidies end.
Therefore, this section analyzes group learning pilot schemes carried out as part
of an institutional innovation in Son La province in Vietnam, and specifically seeks
to understand how these helped integrate knowledge domains and foster network
development within the innovation system. The analysis here therefore unfolds
around the challenges of how to foster group approaches within the hierarchical
extension policy setting, plus how to effectively shape and enable learning groups.
1 This section draws on Schad et al. (2011).
11 Rethinking Knowledge Provision for the Marginalized: Rural Networks. . .
443
information into knowledge and action, and thereby adapting to local situations
and avoiding the pitfalls of centrally planned and locally unsuitable measures.
So seen from a distance, the three decrees shaping the reorganization and
evolution of the agricultural extension and knowledge system have witnessed an
ambitious and highly successful process, and it can be speculated that in 20 years or
so, extension might even reach the standards achieved in more developed states in
terms of decentralization, participation and pluralism, and in terms of being demand
driven, farmer-led and self-help oriented.
11.4 Technical Content Matters and Social Objectives?
Limitations of Novel Group Learning Approaches
in Vietnam
Group-based learning approaches can be an effective means of building farmer
competencies, as they engage people in the processes of experimentation and
development, therein providing space for mutual learning and improving analytical
skills (Schad 2012).
1 Moreover, as maybe the most important side-effect, they
support the evolution of networks and potentially foster recognition of input
suppliers, marketing outlets and knowledge providers. Rather than disseminating
centrally-designed extension messages, group-based learning approaches seek to be
responsive to local information needs and priorities.
Turning towards farmer-led and group-based learning approaches, a recent
publication from the International Food Policy Research Institute (Feder et al.
2010) mentioned group sustainability as a key challenge, given the fact that most
projects in this field are initiated and supported by outside donors (such as NGOs
and government agencies) and often do not manage to survive the critical period
just after the initiator halts engagement. With respect to Vietnam, where farmer-led
approaches to extension are still in their infancy, as discussed in the previous
sections, there is a pressing need to understand how pilot group-based learning
activities are organized and what might be improved, in order for them to become
sustainable once external funding support or subsidies end.
Therefore, this section analyzes group learning pilot schemes carried out as part
of an institutional innovation in Son La province in Vietnam, and specifically seeks
to understand how these helped integrate knowledge domains and foster network
development within the innovation system. The analysis here therefore unfolds
around the challenges of how to foster group approaches within the hierarchical
extension policy setting, plus how to effectively shape and enable learning groups.
1 This section draws on Schad et al. (2011).
11 Rethinking Knowledge Provision for the Marginalized: Rural Networks. . .
443