11. Building Blocks for Sustainable Development Extension
11.1 Moving beyond technology transfer
Within this broader context, science and technology should be seen as providing means to achieve ends that are continually redefined by major social concerns. Similarly, the role of extension has moved beyond offering definitive, generally applicable packages of advice and recommendations on a ‘take it or leave it’ basis. The needs facing rural families and communities vary widely. In many cases we simply do not have definitive answers for the problems facing those who have the responsibility for making sound resource management decisions in an uncertain and ever-changing environment. These challenges, in turn, provide the basis for a new era in research and development (R&D), whereby researchers, farmers and policy makers can learn together how best to manage our natural resources in a sustainable manner. These learning-based approaches explicitly recognise that natural resource management in the age of sustainability is not characterised so much by problems for which an answer must be found, but rather issues that need to be resolved, and will inevitably require one or more of the parties to change their views (Bawden et al. 1984).
For most of this century, the related concepts of extension and technology/information transfer have been used to refer to a straightforward process of reaching out to users (usually farmers) with new knowledge developed through science. Consequently, most research initiatives have been, and still are, largely characterised by the linear transfer of technology (TOT) model of research and development, also known as the diffusion model (Greer & Greer 1996). The dominant metaphors are those of information transfer, technology transfer, channels of communication, and teaching.
This approach is highly successful where a problem has a clearly identifiable end-user (be it an individual enterprise, agency, or industry sector) who acknowledges ownership of the problem, has the capability to fit the research findings/products into their wider organisational management system, and the resources and mandate to act on the solution. In these cases, the findings and products developed from scientific research are readily adopted by end-users, and can be clearly seen to ‘make a difference’ to the management of environmental problems.
Often too, the required research innovation can be regarded as commercial (i.e. its application will improve productivity or cost-effectiveness in the short-term), and the end-user will have a clear idea of the value of the innovation to their management system. For such innovations non-adoption affects no one other than the non-adopting farmer, and since adoption was in the farmer’s interest, it was assumed that adoption would eventually occur (Vanclay & Lawrence 1994). Thus, the science of extension has traditionally been regarded as "the science of the planned change of voluntary decisions through information systems." (Röling 1988 p. ix).
There are, however, obvious difficulties with this approach when translated into the multi-use, multi-value situations which characterise sustainable environmental management (as pointed out by a number of reviewers e.g. Allen et al. 1998; Greer & Greer (1996); Ison 1993; Röling 1988; Russell et al. 1989). The questions that this poses for policy makers, scientists, land managers and other stakeholder groups requires new approaches to extension, or, in other words new ways to link research with management and policy.
In particular, we suggest that the trend towards taking a holistic, multi-use, multi-value view of our natural resources, and the questions that this poses for policy makers, science, land managers, and other stakeholder groups, requires new approaches to extension – or, in other words, new ways to link research with management and policy. An alternative model that encapsulates but goes beyond TOT sees research, dissemination (technology/extension) and users (scientists, policy makers, land managers, etc.) as forming elements of a larger knowledge system. This system can be best viewed as a ‘social’ system through which the different players involved in natural resource management interact to develop new knowledge and refine their world views.
11.2 Role of extension in sustainable development policy
Linking research with management and policy is challenging in these multi-view/value contexts. (e.g., see Box 1). The challenge for science to make a difference is compounded with on the one hand, the need to work with representatives of land managers to develop aids and technologies that can be fitted into their cultural and organisational systems, and on the other hand, the dependence of science research on agencies and organisations with the mandate to develop the wider policy framework and community understanding needed to implement the results. These agencies are themselves often struggling to identify and manage suitable participatory processes to achieve constructive outcomes. Examples include seeking more sustainable management in catchment, ecosystem, or regional, problem situations.
While scientific information is vital for sustainable development, it is important not to overemphasise the role of information in determining the behaviour of land managers on-the-ground. A number of factors influence sustainable development practices, and consequently a range of policy approaches is required if the end goal is to direct or influence land management. This requires the development of regulatory, economic and tenure-related instruments, which work in concert to help motivate stakeholders to engage in sustainable practices. As illustrated in Figure 2, if people are motivated and persuaded that change is worthwhile, with the help of good information and learning-based approaches, they are more likely to respond positively to a range of instruments: voluntary, regulatory, tenure and economic. Effectively then, sustainable development extension should be seen as underpinning all sustainable development policy approaches, rather than only as a policy instrument to encourage voluntary changes.
Figure 2 Major types of policy instruments and their relationship to information learning and motivation (Adapted from Young et al. 1996)
Solving problems associated with sustainable development is not just about changing the behaviour of individual landowners, but about seeking new ways of thinking about systems, neighbours and whole-farm planning. Consequently, sustainable development extension is about engaging stakeholders (including landowners) in the process of learning and adaptive management and about negotiating how to move forward in a complex world, where we do not have all the information we would like. This is consistent with Röling’s (1993) view that moving towards sustainable management should be seen as a cumulative and incremental learning process, not as the adoption of innovations.
| Box 1 Example of challenges in sustainable
development extension The control of bovine Tb is important to maintaining New Zealand’s access to export markets, and serves to illustrate some of the challenges in information management to support an environmental issue. These challenges are: providing access to sound information for decision-making, and encouraging the use of that information in changed behaviour that results in improved environmental management. Control of feral vectors is one aspect of bovine Tb. management. These vectors – possums, deer, pigs, cats, and mustelids are exotic to New Zealand and, in the absence of natural predators, have spread widely, often to the detriment of indigenous flora and fauna (King 1984). Only more recently have they been perceived as major agricultural pests because of their role in the spread of bovine Tb. Much research and management knowledge has been gained in their control over the years, particularly about possums, deer, and pigs, which have all been targeted by hunters for their commercial value. Over recent years mustelids (particularly ferrets) have assumed a growing role in contributing to the spread of Tb, particularly in the South Island (Livingstone 1996), thus illustrating the dynamic nature of goal setting within environmental management. However, they are often viewed by farmers as a natural ally in the management of rabbits. In the past pest control was largely undertaken by local government agencies. However, in keeping with the international trend towards decentralisation and individual responsibility, more effort is now required from land managers. As part of this change the Animal Health Board (the national pest management agency for the control of bovine Tb) encourages individual land managers – and particularly farmers – to take action against this disease. To this end the Board has facilitated the formation of farmer vector-control groups throughout New Zealand, many of which have been formed in North Canterbury. While the incidence of bovine Tb was increasing and expanding in North Canterbury the community was motivated to act. However, other factors serve to complicate efforts to maintain the consistent and long-term efforts needed. For instance, bovine Tb is only visible to farmers when herds are diagnosed as infected. Farmers with newly infected herds are highly motivated to clear them from infection. Once this has been achieved, however, there is a common perception that the Tb problem has been solved, and ongoing enthusiasm for control wanes. Moreover, the cost of infection varies between farm types and is only a problem for farmers with cattle and deer. Other farm enterprises, such as sheep or horticulture, are not affected directly by bovine Tb and so are less motivated to cooperate with their neighbours in undertaking vector control. One difficulty in the fight to rid farms of bovine Tb is the apparent conflict between the management of cats and mustelids and that of rabbits – an often more pressing problem for farmers for whom mustelids may appear a natural ally. A further challenge is the need to gather together, and update, all available information. Although there are a number of individuals in both research and management with immense knowledge in one or more areas of pest management, the information within the industry sector as a whole is fragmented. Moreover, even when best management practices have been drawn up, they are continually superseded because of changing ecological knowledge, legislation, social considerations, and land-use practices. New science and management ‘experiments’ are continually adding to the pool of knowledge leading to new control approaches, and technology. This means that traditional forms of published guidelines quickly become outdated. |
11.3 Collaborative learning and information systems
Sustainable development extension is being influenced by the ideas around collaborative learning. The organisational development, information system, and extension literatures all increasingly refer to collaborative learning, a concept underpinned by constructivism (Kelly 1955). Constructivism challenges approaches to extension that treat learning as a passive process with an emphasis was on ‘teaching,’ that is, transferring the information in the most efficient and effective way for end-users to take on board and then apply.
From a constructivist perspective, people interpret new information through their existing cognitive maps (belief structures or world views), which are influenced, in turn, by the organisation or community grouping to which these people belong (Huber 1991; Michael 1995). Thus, if we wish to change people’s behaviour (e.g., to improve the effectiveness of current pest management activities) then we face the challenge of helping them see the world in a different light (Bawden 1991). The difficulty of this task rests with the inbuilt, and largely unconscious, defensive measures people have to ensure the resilience of their world view (e.g., Argyris 1985; Michael 1995). This explains why linear technology or information transfer workshops and media messages are, by themselves, insufficient mechanisms to promote change.
In contrast, emerging extension approaches emphasise a more active, participatory approach to information management and decision-making and a more collaborative approach between researchers, extension agents, and users. Increased user involvement not only helps keep research and information transfer relevant, and encourages stakeholders to take ownership of outcomes, it also provides key people in the wider community who have to work together (agencies, science, land managers, etc.) with new ideas and perspectives, which they will share with others thus paving the way for improved user thinking and change.
A further tenet of collaborative learning is the idea that a significant component of learning arises from our interactions or the dialogue we have with others, and therefore that the thinking of a community of learners is distributed through networks of conversations. Thus learning can be seen as socially constructed and occurring through interactions between individuals, between individuals and groups, and between different groups. Learners function in a community by developing a shared language and acquiring the community's viewpoint. This emphasises the need for embedding learning in real-world situations, where each learner functions as part of a community of practitioners helping to solve real-world problems.
Understanding how information is produced and used is important background for sustainable development extension. Where there are competing factors and multiple social perspectives, such as in agriculture, ecosystem and catchment management, good decision-making depends on the availability of sound supporting information, although it is often a challenge to raise awareness of the role of science and information in the process. An information system cannot be regarded only in terms of its transfer component (often a field day, workshop, paper, or a computer-based model/DSS). Rather, such a system is better viewed as a 'social system' within which people interact to create new knowledge, and broaden their perspective of the world. Consequently the need for carefully managed participation applies equally to gathering information and developing the systems for managing it as it does to the decision-making and implementation stages.
In summary, there appear to be two main, but interlinked, activities that are key to the learning-based approaches to extension outlined above.
- Developing information and information systems that are responsive to the needs of users
- Creating a favourable social environment for the use of information to underpin constructive change
This requires: appropriate information flows that combine local and science knowledge, full involvement of different stakeholders in learning about the system in question, and interaction between those stakeholders to contextualise and develop a shared understanding of the information. This is particularly important in developing much of the base information needed to underpin policy and best practice.
Even when science technologies (e.g., information, DSSs, models) have been developed with a high degree of awareness of stakeholder needs, getting this used to support management decision-making at a wider level is still a major problem. This is particularly true in relation to wider ecosystem and catchment management questions where there are many players involved, many perspectives on the situation and where science and other information is subject to diverse and contested interpretations.
Accordingly, the second activity focuses on understanding how to create a favourable social environment, at district and regional levels, in which science and other information can be most constructively used by the different stakeholder groups. This social environment is one characterised by a high degree of social capital. Where this is present, the different groups involved (industry, land managers, tangata whenua, regional and local councils, science, etc.) are open to different viewpoints, there is trust between the different players, and there are well-developed networking paths that are both horizontal (across agencies and sectors) and vertical (agencies to communities to individuals). Exploring how this can be achieved involves working with institutions and agencies mandated to support environmental management and change. These agencies need to build capacity to support improved participatory processes, both amongst their own staff and among the different on-the-ground stakeholder groups.
Contact for Enquiries
Rural Affairs Coordinator
Sector Performance Policy
MAF Policy
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 4 894 0675
Fax: +64 4 4 894 0745
Contact this person
