Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The impact of formal agricultural education on farm level innovation and management practices

  • Published:
The Journal of Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Knowledge transfer in agriculture or what is conventionally known as agricultural extension is typically based on two activities: the delivery of education and the provision of advisory services. Formal agricultural education levels have steadily improved over time in Ireland and this growth in the human capital of the agricultural sector is a key aspect of the “smart” agenda set out in National Agricultural Development Strategies. In this paper we focus on the impact of one aspect of agricultural knowledge transfer process by considering the relationship between participation in formal agricultural education, farm level income outcomes and the pathways by which these outcomes are realised via innovation and management practice. In doing so, we contribute to the branch of the wider technology transfer literature concerned with identifying the impact of knowledge transfer activities and also understanding the role of competence building within knowledge transfer processes. Formal agricultural education can impact private returns in terms of improved technical and allocative efficiency. In most Irish agricultural sectors, we find a positive return to agricultural education and in particular a positive relationship in relation to technical efficiency in terms of improved yields. The result is, however, weak in the tillage sector. Evidence of improved allocative efficiency is in general weak, except for the commercial dairy sector. We do, however, find that earlier adopters of innovations or best management practice are more likely to have formal agricultural education. This may be due to reduced risk aversion, higher skills and better decision making. However, as mature technologies and management practices become mainstream across many farmer types, this relationship does not hold.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Source: Teagasc NFS

Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Source: Teagasc NFS

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Very small farms and pig farms are excluded.

  2. See “Appendix” for a description of the agricultural education structure in Ireland.

  3. All changes over time in this section are derived by comparing the average of the two years at the beginning and end of the period 2001 to 2011.

  4. Clonakilty Agricultural College; Kildalton Agricultural and Horticultural College; Ballyhaise Agricultural College; College of Amenity Horticulture; Teagasc eCollege.

  5. Gurteen Agricultural College; Mountbellew Agricultural College; Pallaskenry Agricultural College.

References

  • Ali, M., & Byerlee, D. (1991). Economic efficiency of small farmers in a changing world: A survey of recent evidence. Journal of International Development, 3, 1–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azhar, R. A. (1991). Education and technical efficiency during the green revolution in Pakistan. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 39(3), 651–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, G. S. (1962). Investment in human capital: A theoretical analysis. The Journal of Political Economy, 70(5), 9–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogue, P. (2013). Impact of participation in Teagasc dairy discussion groups, Broadmore Research.

  • Connolly, L., Kinsella, A., Quinlan, G., & Moran, B. (2010). National farm survey. Athenry, Ireland: Teagasc, Rural Economy Research Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Agriculture, and Food and the Marine. (2010). The food harvest 2020: A vision for Irish agri-food and fisheries. Dublin: Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Food.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Agriculture, and Food and the Marine. (2015). Local roots global reach. Food wise 2025. A 10-year vision for the Irish agri-food industry. Dublin: Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Food.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC. (2005). EU farm economics overview report. Brussels: Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development.

  • Feller, I. (1984). Reconsideration of the agricultural transfer model. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 8(2), 47–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griliches, Z. (1957). Hybrid corn: An exploration in the economics of technological change. Econometrica, 25, 501–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennessy, T., & Heanue, K. (2012). Quantifying the effect of discussion group membership on technology adoption and farm profit on dairy farms. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension, 18(1), 41–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huffman, W. E. (1999). Human capital: Education and agriculture. In B. L. Gardner & G. C. Rausser (Eds.), Handbook of agricultural economics (pp. 333–381). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, J., Weir, S., & Woldehanna, T. (2003). The role of education in facilitating risk-taking and innovation in agriculture. Journal of Development Studies, 39(6), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kochenkova, A., Grimaldi, R., & Munari, F. (2016). Public policy measures in support of knowledge transfer activities: A review of academic literature. Journal of Technology Transfer, 41, 407–429. doi:10.1007/s10961-015-9416-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, J. Y. (1991). Education and innovation adoption in agriculture: Evidence from hybrid rice in China. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 73(3), 713–723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockheed, E., Jamison, T., & Lau, L. (1980). Farmer education and farm efficiency: A survey. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 29(1), 37–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFall, G. D., & McKelvey, J. P. (1989). The cooperative extension service: A model for technology transfer. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 14(1), 40–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R., & Phelps, E. S. (1966). Investment in humans, technological diffusion, and economic growth. The American Economic Review, 56(1/2), 69–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, J. M. (1994). Farmer education and farmer efficiency: A meta-analysis. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 43(1), 149–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reimers, M., & Klasen, S. (2011). Revisiting the role of education for agricultural productivity, discussion paper no. 90, Courant Research Centre, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Germany (August): A revised version of this paper is forthcoming in the American Journal of Agricultural Economics (AJAE).

  • Rigou, A., & Koutsouris, A. (2011). Agricultural training and entrepreneurship: The case of ‘Young Farmers’ in a Greek Prefecture. In 20th European seminar of extension education private–public partnerships for advisory services in Europe. Proceedings of the 20th ESEE, JTO School of Management, Kirkkonummi, Finland. ISBN 978-951-9411-54-5.

  • Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations (1st ed.). New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, T. W. (1975). The value of the ability to deal with disequilibria. Journal of Economic Literature, 13(3), 827–846.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weir, S., & Knight, J. (2004). Externality effects of education: Dynamics of the adoption and diffusion of an innovation in rural Ethiopia. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 53(1), 93–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welch, F. (1970). Education in production. The Journal of Political Economy, 78(1), 35–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolek, F. W. (1985). Transferring federal technology in agriculture. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 9(2), 57–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wozniak, G. D. (1987). Human capital, information and the early adoption of new technology. Journal of Human Resources, 2(1), 101–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: A review, reconceptualisation, and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27, 185–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National University of Ireland, Galway and Rural Economy and Development Programme, Teagasc, Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland

    Cathal O’Donoghue

  2. Evaluation Unit, Teagasc, Athenry, Co. Galway, Ireland

    Kevin Heanue

Authors
  1. Cathal O’Donoghue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kevin Heanue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kevin Heanue.

Appendix: Formal agricultural education

Appendix: Formal agricultural education

The four categories of formal agricultural education used in this study are:

1.1 (1) Agricultural college

This category includes the range of higher level education programmes (and all further education programmes not included in the ‘Agricultural Certificate’ category below) in agriculture, horticulture, agri-business, agricultural mechanisation and equine studies which are provided jointly between Teagasc colleges and some Institutes of Technology (Cork Institute of Technology; Dundalk Institute of Technology; Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology; Waterford Institute of Technology; Limerick Institute of Technology; Athlone Institute of Technology and Tralee Institute of Technology). Teagasc has a network of 4 colleges,Footnote 4 an e college and there are also 3 private colleges.Footnote 5 The courses are accredited by the Higher Education and Training Awards Council (HETAC) and are applied for through the Central Applications Office (CAO) system. In most situations holders of Higher Certificates are eligible to progress up the National Framework of Qualifications ladder.

1.1.1 Higher level education programmes

As of 2014, there are 11 higher level programmes delivered in collaboration between Teagasc and various Institutes of Technology. For more information see: www.teagasc.i.e./training/courses.asp

  • Higher Certificate in Agriculture—HETAC Level 6

  • Higher Certificate in Technology in Agricultural Mechanisation—HETAC Level 6

  • Bachelor of Business in Rural Enterprise and Agribusiness—HETAC Level 7

  • Bachelor of Science in Agriculture and Environmental Management—HETAC Level 7

  • Bachelor of Science in Agricultural Science—HETAC Level 7

  • Bachelor of Agricultural Science (Hons) in Dairy Business—HETAC Level 8

  • Teagasc Professional Diploma in Dairy Farm Management—HETAC Level 7

  • Bachelor of Science in Horticulture—HETAC Level 7

  • Bachelor of Science in Horticulture—HETAC Level 8

  • Higher Certificate in Business in Equine Studies—HETAC Level 6

1.2 (2) Agricultural certificate

Further education courses) are accredited by the Further Education and Training Awards Council (FETAC) and application is usually directly to Teagasc colleges or Regional Education Centres (REC). These courses are suitable for people who wish to make a career in agriculture, horticulture, the equine sector or forestry but who do not wish to complete a higher level course. There is no minimum educational entry requirement but those who have completed the Leaving Certificate are likely to benefit most. Of particular interest is the Certificate in Agriculture (FETAC Level 5) and Specific Purpose Certificate in Farm Administration (Teagasc Green Cert, FETAC Level 6) which are delivered in both Agricultural Colleges (Teagasc and private) and, uniquely among the Further Education courses, at Teagasc Regional Education Centres (REC). Within the colleges these courses of study are full time. If delivered in a Teagasc REC they are part time. As a general rule, those attending at an REC are over 23 years of age, while those pursuing a Certificate at an agricultural college are under 23 years of age. The agricultural certificate is considered the key foundation qualification for farmers, not least due to its practical orientation which includes a 12 week farm placement).

1.2.1 Further education programmes

All of Teagasc’s further education courses are accredited by FETAC. These courses are suitable for people who wish to make a career in agriculture, horticulture, horses or forestry but who do not wish to complete a higher level course. There is no minimum educational entry requirement but those who have completed the Leaving Certificate are likely to benefit most. Participants who achieve the necessary results may transfer to higher level courses and progress up the National Framework of Qualifications ladder. For more information see: www.teagasc.i.e./training/courses.asp

  • Certificate in Agriculture—FETAC Level 5

  • Specific Purpose Certificate in Farm Administration (Teagasc Green Cert)—FETAC Level 6

  • Advanced Certificate in Agriculture—Dairy Herd Management—FETAC Level 6

  • Advanced Certificate in Agriculture—Drystock Management—FETAC Level 6

  • Advanced Certificate in Agriculture—Agricultural Mechanisation—FETAC Level 6

  • Advanced Certificate in Agriculture—Crop and Machinery Management—FETAC Level 6

  • Certificate in Horticulture—FETAC Level 5

  • Advanced Certificate in Horticulture—FETAC Level 6

  • Certificate in Horsemanship (Equitation or Stud Management)—FETAC Level 5

  • Advanced Certificate in Horsemanship—FETAC Level 6

  • Advanced Certificate in Equine Breeding (Stud Management)—FETAC Level 6

  • Certificate in Forestry—FETAC Level 5

  • Advanced Certificate in Forestry—FETAC Level 6

1.3 (3) University

Degree level agricultural training is delivered in some universities. Three examples include the Bachelor of Science in Horticulture delivered by Dublin City University and the College of Amenity Horticulture, National Botanic Gardens; the Bachelor of Agricultural Science (Hons) in Dairy Business delivered in UCD and Teagasc Moorepark and Kildalton and the broader Bachelor of Agricultural Science in UCD.

1.4 (4) Short courses

Lifelong learning and continuing education are now a feature of all professions and walks of life. To meet this demand Teagasc offers a wide range of courses for adults and agri-food sector employees. The courses, which are delivered at local Teagasc offices, are delivered in modules of 12.5 or 25 h duration. Some of the courses are accredited by FETAC and participants have the option of accumulating modules and progression to FETAC major awards. The courses are provided subject to demand and staff resources being available. The list below is not exhaustive. For more information see: www.teagasc.ie/training/courses.asp

  • Forestry—short course and events

  • Horticulture—specialised short courses

  • Organic Farming

  • Teagasc Options Programme

  • Goat Farming

  • Poultry Farming

  • Artisan Food Courses

  • Rural Tourism

  • Rural Business

  • Equine:

  • Pesticides

  • Milking Skills

  • Internet for Farmers

  • Hedgerow Management

  • Mechanical Hedge Cutting Contractors Course

  • REPS Five Hour Optional Countryside Management Courses

  • Energy—Level 6 Certificate in Energy Crop Management (FETAC accredited minor award),

  • Ruminant Nutrition—Level 6 Certificate in Ruminant Nutrition (FETAC accredited special purpose award)

  • Teagasc Crop Nutrition and IASIS Crop Protection Courses—Level 6 Certificate in Crop Nutrition (FETAC accredited special purpose award)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

O’Donoghue, C., Heanue, K. The impact of formal agricultural education on farm level innovation and management practices. J Technol Transf 43, 844–863 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9529-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9529-9

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation