Agricultural Extension Models in South America: A Description of Systems in Use in Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay

Arboleya, J.; Restaino, E.

doi:10.21273/horttech.14.1.0014

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As landscape context largely determines the effectiveness of local efforts to enhance biodiversity in simple agricultural landscapes (Tscharntke et al, 2005), cross-boundary management will be crucial for achieving multiobjective agroecological objectives. Successful examples of farmer-to-farmer networks of horizontal learning in South America (Arboleya & Restaino, 2004), US-based conservation frameworks such as the Working Lands for Wildlife Initiative (USDA NRCS, WLW, n.d.-b), and cross-boundary land management collectives for native ecosystems such as the Center for Large Landscape Conservation (Curtin & Tabor, 2016) should be looked to as models to support future farmland conservation strategies that span large spatial scales. Including farmers in these networks may improve adoption by motivating conservation-minded land managers and underscoring the value of farmland contributions to landscape diversity.…”

Section: Synthesis and Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Landscape context affects patch habitat contributions to biodiversity in agroecosystems

Duff,

Debinski,

Maxwell

2024

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effective conservation schemes are needed to advance the dual objectives of biodiversity conservation and agronomic production in agricultural landscapes. Understanding how plant and arthropod taxa respond to both local habitat patch characteristics and landscape complexity is crucial for planning effective agri‐environment schemes. This study investigated the relative effects of local variables (plant and insect diversity ≤100 m from patch habitat center) and landscape variables (landscape composition and configuration metrics ≤5 km from patch habitat center) on the diversity of plants and arthropods within noncrop habitat patches (1) at different spatial extents ranging from 0.1 to 5 km, while (2) quantifying differential effects of local and landscape variables on particular components of diversity (i.e., species richness and abundance), and accounting for (3) particular components of landscape extent (0.1‐, 0.5‐, 1‐, 2‐, and 5‐km radii) and complexity (i.e., landscape composition and configuration). Landscape variables were significantly correlated with local plant and arthropod species richness and abundance at all spatial extents. Biodiversity responses to landscape variables were largely scale‐dependent, as pairwise comparisons were significantly different between all spatial extents except between 1‐ and 2‐km extents, and correlations were lowest at the 5‐km extent. Partial R2 values for predicting local biodiversity were highest when both local and landscape variables were included as predictors of species richness and abundance, increasing from 0.163 to 0.469 when landscape variables were included, underscoring the importance of considering both local and landscape effects on local diversity. Landscape configuration variables accounted for more variation in plant and arthropod species richness than composition variables. However, models performed best when composition and configuration were considered together rather than alone, suggesting that both components of landscape complexity should be considered for identifying and managing conservation areas in crop fields. Existing conservation schemes that incentivize farmers to create or conserve seminatural patch habitat within crop fields may be more effective when combined with landscape‐scale designs that enhance landscape complexity across the Northern Great Plains. Local conservation efforts should be coordinated with landscape‐level efforts to ultimately enhance biodiversity and desired ecosystem service outcomes across agricultural landscapes.

show abstract

Section: Synthesis and Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Landscape context affects patch habitat contributions to biodiversity in agroecosystems

Duff,

Debinski,

Maxwell

2024

Ecosphere

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, convincing people that a crop or crops are profitable, is sometimes insufficient by just showing a calculation on paper. It will need proof in practice, for example by demonstration on the field, as frequently suggested by extension literatures [60][61][62][63][64].…”

Section: Implications Of Findings For Extension Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Farmer Decision on Cocoa Farm in North Lombok, Indonesia

Sjah¹,

Ridwan²,

Ibrahim³

et al. 2022

Advances in Biological Sciences Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Agricultural land in North Lombok, Indonesia, provides farmers with several choices of crops to be grown, among others is cocoa. However, farmer reasons for growing this crop is not completely documented. This paper explores farmer reasons for growing the crop and models their decisions. This paper used secondary data and field observation to serve the study objectives. The unit of analysis is cocoa grower in North Lombok. Data were analyzed in a descriptive way, providing farmer reasons or motives for growing the crop and building models to bridge farmer decisions in growing the chosen crop. This study found that there are three reasons that guide farmers into growing cocoa, i.e. income, social relation, and available time. These three reasons are then utilized to build the farmer decision model for the crop choice. The model indicates that cocoa growers are rational. This result also implies for extension activities, to be implemented in an effective way.

show abstract

“…Its purpose is to transfer new technology from research stations to farmers. It is typically based on the training and visit (T&V) systems whereby extension workers are trained in new technologies, and they then visit farmers and train them (Arboleya & Restaino, 2004;Benor, Harrison, & Baxter, 1984;Dejene, 1989). On occasions, demonstration plots are set up to help convince farmers that the technology is appropriate and worthwhile.…”

Section: Agricultural Extension Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extension Service and Farmer Decision Making on New Cropping Lands in East Lombok Indonesia

Sjah¹,

Cameron²,

Woodford³

2006

JIAEE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper analyses farming systems management on new cropping lands in East Lombok, Indonesia, and its applications for extension. This research was conducted using semistructured interviews with 41 farmer respondents managing new lands, and 27 key informants representing different viewpoints. A methodology that unifies the real-life choice theory of Gladwin (1980) and personal construct theory of Kelly (1955; 1991) was used to elicit relevant farmer decision information. By focusing on both behaviours and motivation, the approach was found to be effective in both describing farmer decisions and eliciting decision processes. It is concluded that productivity on new lands is low, but not because of lack of experience or irrational decision making by farmers. Contributing factors included deficiencies in water availability, soil structure and fertility, and an inability of research and extension services to provide solutions. These results highlight the need for a farming systems approach to research and extension that is farmer-centric in relation to both objectives and resources.

show abstract

Agricultural Extension Models in South America: A Description of Systems in Use in Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Landscape context affects patch habitat contributions to biodiversity in agroecosystems

Landscape context affects patch habitat contributions to biodiversity in agroecosystems

Farmer Decision on Cocoa Farm in North Lombok, Indonesia

Extension Service and Farmer Decision Making on New Cropping Lands in East Lombok Indonesia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About