Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Role of Extension in Agricultural Technology Transfer: A Critical Review

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
From Agriscience to Agribusiness

Part of the book series: Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management ((ITKM))

Abstract

Technology transfer (TT), or transfer of technology (TOT), is an integral part of the extension process involving the transfer and spread of technical innovation and know-how to the farming population. The TOT model of the research-extension-farmer linkage is based on the tenets of DOI theory, in particular on a description of the diffusion process as a normal bell-shaped curve with farmers being placed in one of five categories according to their appearance on the curve. However, this linear model has limitations and has been severely criticized on a number of grounds, especially its assumptions about the dissemination process which raise the “issue of equality” and contribute to the “agricultural treadmill.”

Furthermore, despite being dominant in agricultural development, on a worldwide basis, TOT has lost utility in understanding the sources of and thus the solutions to highly complex contemporary problems. As a result, alternative proposals have emerged, prominent among which have been systemic approaches such as systems of innovations (SoI). Therefore, there has been a shift of conceptual frameworks in the study of agriculture-related policy, research, technology, and rural development toward agricultural innovation systems (AIS) focusing on processes relevant to innovation networks as formed by heterogeneous actors with particular attention being given to social coordination. In this respect, a new species emerges, that of “intermediaries” (innovation facilitators/brokers) who take an independent systemic role in process facilitation rather than in the production or dissemination of innovation. New systemic extension approaches thus emerge, aiming at the role of co-learning facilitators to stimulate innovations.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alexopoulos, G., A. Koutsouris, and E. Tzouramani. 2009. The Financing of Extension Services: a Survey Among Rural Youth in Greece. The Journal of Agricultural Education & Extension 15: 175–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allahyari, M., M. Chizari, and S. Mirdamadi. 2009. Extension-Education Methods to Facilitate Learning in Sustainable Agriculture. Journal of Agriculture & Social Sciences 5: 27–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C., and D. Schön. 1974. Theory in Practice: Increasing Professional Effectiveness. San Fransisco: Josey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ascroft, J.R., N. Röling, J. Kariuki, and F. Shege. 1973. Extension and the Forgotten Farmer. Bulletin van de Afdelingen Sociale Wetenschappen. Wageningen: Agricultural University of Wageningen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auvine, B., B. Densmore, M. Extrom, S. Poole, and M. Shanklin. 2002. What Do We Mean by Facilitation. Group Facilitation: A Research and Applications Journal 4: 53–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakici, T., E. Almirall, and J. Wareham. 2013. The Role of Public Open Innovation Intermediaries in Local Government and the Public Sector. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 25: 311–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bawden, R. 2005. Systemic Development at Hawkesbury: Some Personal Lessons from Experience. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 22: 151–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bijker, W.E. 1995. Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs: Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birner, R., K. Davis, J. Pender, E. Nkonya, P. Anandajayasekeram, J. Ekboir, A. Mbabu, D.J. Spielman, D. Horna, S. Benin, and M. Cohen. 2009. From Best Practice to Best Fit: A Framework for Designing and Analyzing Pluralistic Agricultural Advisory Services Worldwide. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 15: 341–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, D., and D. Vist. 1984. Historical Roots and Philosophy of Extension. In Extension Handbook, ed. D. Blackbourn, 1–10. Guelf: University of Guelf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boari, C., and F. Riboldazzi. 2014. How Knowledge Brokers Emerge and Evolve: The Role of Actors’ Behaviour. Research Policy 43: 683–695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botes, L., and D. van Rensburg. 2000. Community Participation in Development: Nine Plagues and Twelve Commandments. Community Development Journal 35: 41–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunori, G., D. Barjolle, A.C. Dockes, S. Helmle, J. Ingram, L. Klerkx, H. Moschitz, G. Nemes, and T. Tisenkopfs. 2013. CAP Reform and Innovation: The Role of Learning and Innovation Networks. EuroChoices 12: 27–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R.S. 2005. Brokerage and Closure. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byerlee, D., L. Harrington, and D.L. Winkelmann. 1982. Farming Systems Research: Issues in Research Strategy and Technology Design. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 64: 897–904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A. 1997. Facilitating Landcare: Conceptual and Practical Dilemmas. In Critical Landcare, ed. S. Lockie and F. Vanclay, 143–152. Wagga Wagga: Centre for Rural Social Research, Charles Stuart University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, B., ed. 1995. Technological Systems and Economic Performance: The Case of Factory Automation. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, R. 1992. Rural Appraisal: Rapid, Relaxed and Participatory. In IDS Discussion Paper 311. Brighton: IDS.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1993. Challenging the Professions: Frontiers for Rural Development. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1994. The Origins and Practice of Participatory Rural Appraisal. World Development 22: 953–969.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane, W.W. 1958. Farm Prices: Myth and Reality. St. Paul: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collinson, M., ed. 2000. A History of Farming Systems Research. Wallingford: FAO, IFSA and CABI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, B., and U. Kothari, eds. 2001. Participation: The New Tyranny? London: Zed-Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coombs, P.H., and M. Ahmed. 1974. Attacking Rural Poverty: How Non-Formal Education Can Help. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corsaro, D., C. Cantù, and A. Tunisini. 2012. Actors’ Heterogeneity in Innovation Networks. Industrial Marketing Management 41: 780–789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cristóvão, A., P. Ferrao, R. Madeira, M.L. Tibério, M.J. Rainho, and M.S. Teixeira. 2008. Circles and Communities, Sharing Practices and Learning: Looking at Old and New Extension Education Approaches. In Empowerment of Rural Actors: A Renewal of Farming Systems Perspectives, ed. B. Didieu and S. Zasser-Bedoya, 797–807. Montpellier: INRA-SAD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cristóvão, A., A. Koutsouris, and M. Kügler. 2012. Extension Systems and Change Facilitation for Agricultural and Rural Development. In Farming Systems Research into the 21st Century: The New Dynamic, ed. I. Darnhofer, D. Gibbon, and B. Dedieu, 201–227. Dordrecht: Springer Science.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dalal-Clayton, B., and S. Bass. 2002. Sustainable Development Strategies. London: Earthscan (OECD and UNDP).

    Google Scholar 

  • Darnhofer, I., D. Gibbon, and B. Dedieu, eds. 2012. Farming systems research into the 21st century: The new dynamic. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davenport, T., and L. Prusak. 1998. Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deugd, M., N. Röling, and E.M.A. Smaling. 1998. A New Praxeology for Integrated Nutrient Management, Facilitating Innovation with and by Farmers. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 71: 269–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devaux, A., J. Andrade-Piedra, D. Horton, M. Ordinola, G. Thiele, A. Thomann, and C. Velasco. 2010. Brokering Innovation for Sustainable Development: The Papa Andina Case. ILAC Working Paper 12. Rome: Institutional Learning and Change (ILAC) Initiative.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dhanaraj, C., and A. Parkhe. 2006. Orchestrating Innovation Networks. The Academy of Management Review 31: 659–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dredge, D. 2006. Policy Networks and the Local Organisation of Tourism. Tourism Management 27: 269–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drennon, C., and R. Cervero. 2002. The Politics of Facilitation in Practitioner Inquiry Groups. Adult Education Quarterly 52: 193–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edquist, C., ed. 1997. Systems of Innovation: Technologies, Institutions and Organizations. London: Pinter Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • EU-SCAR. 2012. Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems in Transition - a reflection paper. Brussels: Standing Committee on Agricultural Research (SCAR), Collaborative Working Group AKIS.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. Agricultural knowledge and innovation systems towards 2020. Brussels: Standing Committee on Agricultural Research (SCAR), Collaborative Working Group AKIS-2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fadeeva, Z. 2005. Translation of Sustainability Ideas in Tourism Networks: Some Roles of Cross-Sectoral Networks in Change Towards Sustainable Development. Journal of Cleaner Production 13: 175–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faure, G., P. Rebuffel, and D. Violas. 2011. Systemic Evaluation of Advisory Services to Family Farms in West Africa. The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 17: 325–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garforth, C. 1982. Reaching the Poor: A Review of Extension Strategies and Methods. In Progress in Rural Extension and Community Development, ed. G. Jones and M. Rolls, vol. 1, 43–70. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garforth, C., and A. Lawrence. 1997. Supporting Sustainable Agriculture Through Extension in Asia. Natural Resources Perspectives 21. London: ODI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geels, F. 2004. From Sectoral Systems of Innovation to Socio-Technical Systems. Insights About Dynamics and Change from Sociology and Institutional Theory. Research Policy 33: 897–920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. 1973. The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology 78: 1360–1380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1985. Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology 91: 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. 1984. The Theory of Communicative Action: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haga, T. 2005. Action Research and Innovation in Networks, Dilemmas and Challenges: Two Cases. Artificial Intelligence & Society 19: 362–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2009. Orchestration of Network Instruments: A Way to De-Emphasize the Partition Between Incremental Change and Innovation? Artificial Intelligence & Society 23: 17–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, G., A. Loftus-Hills, J. Rycroft-Malone, A. Titchen, A. Kitson, B. McCormack, and K. Seers. 2002. Getting Evidence into Practice: The Role and Function of Facilitation. Journal of Advanced Nursing 37: 577–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heemskerk, W., L. Klerkx, and J. Sitima. 2011. Brokering Innovation. In Putting Heads Together: Agricultural Innovation Platforms in Practice, ed. S. Nederlof, M. Wongtschowksi, and F. van der Lee, 43–54. Amsterdam: KIT Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hekkert, M.P., R.A.A. Suurs, S.O. Negro, S. Kuhlmann, and R.E.H.M. Smits. 2007. Functions of Innovation Systems: A New Approach for Analysing Technological Change. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 74: 413–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hemmati, M. 2002. Multi-stakeholder Processes for Governance and Sustainability - Beyond Deadlock and Conflict. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hermans, F., M. Stuiver, P.J. Beers, and K. Kok. 2013. The Distribution of Roles and Functions for Upscaling and Outscaling Innovations in Agricultural Innovation Systems. Agricultural Systems 115: 117–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hjorth, P., and A. Bagheri. 2006. Navigating Towards Sustainable Development: A System Dynamics Approach. Futures 38: 74–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hogan, C. 2002. Understanding Facilitation: Theory and Practice. London: Kogan Page Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoppe, H., and E. Ozdenoren. 2005. Intermediation in Innovation. International Journal of Industrial Organization 23: 483–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howells, J. 2006. Intermediation and the Role of Intermediaries in Innovation. Research Policy 35: 715–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hubert, B., R. Ison, and N. Röling. 2000. The “Problematique” with Respect to Industrialised Country Agricultures. In Cow Up a Tree, Knowing and Learning for Change in Agriculture – Case Studies from Industrialised Countries, ed. LEARN Group, 13–30. Paris: INRA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, T.P. 1987. The Evolution of Large Technological Systems. In The Social construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, ed. W.E. Bijker, T.P. Hughes, and T.J. Pinch, 51–82. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ison, R. 2010. Systems Practice: How to Act in a Climate-Change World. London: Springer and The Open University.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ison, R., and D. Russel, eds. 2000. Agricultural Extension and Rural Development: Breaking Out of Traditions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, G., and C. Garforth. 1997. The History, Development, and Future of Agricultural Extension. In Improving Agricultural Extension A Reference Manual, ed. E. Burton, R. Swanson, A. Bentz, and J. Sofranko, 2–12. Rome: FAO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katzy, B., E. Turgut, T. Holzmann, and K. Sailer. 2013. Innovation Intermediaries: A Process View on Open Innovation Coordination. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 25: 295–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keen, M., V. Brown, and R. Dyball. 2005. Social Learning: A New Approach to Environmental Management. In Social Learning in Environmental Management – Towards a Sustainable Future, ed. M. Keen, V. Brown, and R. Dyball, 3–21. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilelu, K., L. Klerkx, C. Leeuwis, and A. Hall. 2011. Beyond Knowledge Brokerage: An Exploratory Study of Innovation Intermediaries in an Evolving Smallholder agricultural System in Kenya. RIU Discussion Paper 13. London: DFID.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkels, Y., and G. Duysters. 2010. Brokerage in SME Networks. Research Policy 39: 375–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klerkx, L., and P. Gildemacher. 2012. The Role of Innovation Brokers in Agricultural Innovation Systems. In Agricultural Innovation systems: An investment sourcebook, 221–230. Washington: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klerkx, L., and C. Leeuwis. 2008a. Balancing Multiple Interests: Embedding Innovation Intermediation in the Agricultural Knowledge Infrastructure. Technovation 28: 364–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008b. Matching Demand and Supply in the Agricultural Knowledge Infrastructure: Experiences with Innovation Intermediaries. Food Policy 33: 260–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2009. Establishment and Embedding of Innovation Brokers at Different Innovation System Levels: Insights from the Dutch Agricultural Sector. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 76: 849–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klerkx, L., N. Aarts, and C. Leeuwis. 2010. Adaptive Management in Agricultural Innovation Systems: The Interactions Between Innovation Networks and their Environment. Agricultural Systems 103: 390–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klerkx, L., B. Van Mierlo, and C. Leeuwis. 2012. Evolution of System Approaches to Agricultural Innovations: Concepts, Analysis and Interventions. In Farming Systems Research into the 21st Century: The New Dynamic, ed. I. Darnhofer, D. Gibbon, and B. Dedieu, 457–483. Dordrecht: Springer Science.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, C., and C. Lyall. 2013. Knowledge Brokers: the Role of Intermediaries in Producing Research Impact. Evidence & Policy 9: 309–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, D. 1984. Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. N. Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koutsouris, A. 2008. Higher Education Facing Sustainability: The Case of Agronomy. International Journal of Learning 15: 269–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koutsouris, A., and D. Papadopoulos. 2003. What is ‘Social’ about Social Learning? The Journal of Agricultural Education & Extension 9: 75–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamble, W. 1984. Diffusion and Adoption of Innovations. In Extension Handbook, ed. D. Blackbourn, 32–41. Guelf: University of Guelf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landry, R., N. Amara, J.S. Cloutier, and N. Halilem. 2013. Technology Transfer Organizations: Services and Business Models. Technovation 33: 431–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LEARN Group. 2000. Cow up a Tree: Learning and Knowing Processes for Change in Agriculture; Case Studies from Industrialised Countries. Paris: INRA Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leal, P. 2007. Participation: The Ascendancy of a Buzzword in the neo-Liberal Era. Development in Practice 17: 539–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leeuwis, C. 2000. Learning to be Sustainable. The Journal of Agricultural Education & Extension 7: 79–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2004. Communication for Rural Innovation: Rethinking Agricultural Extension. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Leeuwis, C., and R. Pyburn, eds. 2002. Wheelbarrows full of Frogs – Social Learning in Rural Resource Management: International Research and Reflections. Assen: Van Gorcum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leeuwis, C., N. Long, and M. Villareal. 1990. Equivocations on Knowledge Systems Theory: An Actor-Oriented Critique. Knowledge, Technology and Policy 3: 19–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ljung, M., and A. Emmelin. 2000. The Development of Farmers; Dialogue: The Decision Making Process Behind a Facilitated Learning Process in Swedish Agriculture. In European Farming and Rural Systems Research and Extension into the Next Millennium: Environmental, Agricultural and Socio-economic Issues, ed. A. Koutsouris and L. Omodei-Zorini, 336–357. Athens: Papazisis Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Long, N. 1992. Conclusion. In Battlefields of Knowledge, ed. N. Long and A. Long, 268–277. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundvall, B.-Å., ed. 1992. National Systems of Innovation: Toward a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Pinter Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maunder, A.H. 1972. Agricultural Extension: A Reference Manual. Rome: FAO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moschitz, H., G. Brunori, D. Roep, and T. Tisenkofs, (guest eds). 2015. Learning and Innovation Networks for Sustainable Agriculture: Processes of Co-Evolution, Joint Reflection and Facilitation. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension 21: 1–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel, U.J. 1997. Alternative Approaches to Organizing Extension. In Improving Agricultural Extension A Reference Manual, ed. E. Burton, R. Swanson, A. Bentz, and J. Sofranko, 13–24. Rome: FAO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nederlof, S., M. Wongtschowksi, and F. van der Lee, eds. 2011. Putting Heads Together: Agricultural Innovation Platforms in Practice. Amsterdam: KIT Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nerbonne, J.F., and R. Lentz. 2003. Rooted in Grass: Challenging Patterns of Knowledge Exchange as a Means of Fostering Social Change in a Southeast Minnesota Farm Community. Agriculture and Human Values 20: 65–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nitsch, U. 1982. Farmers’ Perceptions of and Preferences Concerning Agricultural Extension Programs. Uppsala: Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Dept. of Economics and Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oakley, P., et al. 1991. Projects with People: The Practice of Participation in Rural Development. Geneva: ILO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, P., and J. Myers. 2003. Networks, Diffusion, and Cycles of Collective Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Packham, R., and N. Sriskandarajah. 2005. Systemic Action Research for Postgraduate Education in Agriculture and Rural Development. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 22: 119–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, R., and D. Hine. 2014. The Role of Knowledge Intermediaries in Developing Firm Learning Capabilities. European Planning Studies 22: 1048–1061.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pretty, J. 1995. Regenerating Agriculture: Policies and Practice for Sustainability and Self-reliance. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quaghebeur, K., J. Masschelein, and H. Nguyen. 2004. Paradox of Participation: Giving or Taking Part? Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 14: 154–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivera, W., and M.K. Qamar. 2013. Agricultural Extension, Rural Development and the Food Security Challenge. Rome: FAO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rivera, W., and W. Zijp. 2002. Contracting for Agricultural Extension. International Case Studies and Emerging Practices. Washington D.C: CABI Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rivera, W.M., M.K. Qamar, and H.K. Mwandemere. 2005. Enhancing Coordination Among AKIS/RD Actors: An Analytical And Comparative Review of Country Studies on Agricultural Knowledge and Information Systems for Rural Development (AKIS/RD). Rome: FAO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, L. 2002. Participatory Rural Appraisal: A brief introduction. Group Facilitation: A Research & Applications Journal 4: 45–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E.M., ed. 1976a. Communication and Development: Critical Perspectives. Beverly Hills: Sage Publ.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1976b. Communication and Development: The Passing of the Dominant Paradigm. In Communication and Development: Critical Perspectives, ed. E. Rogers, 121–148. Beverly Hills: Sage Publ.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1976c. New Perspectives on Communication and Development: Overview. In Communication and Development: Critical Perspectives, ed. E.M. Rogers, 7–15. Beverly Hills: Sage Publ.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1962, 1983. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E.M., and F.F. Shoemaker. 1971. Communication of Innovations: A Cross-Cultural Approach. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E.M., J.D. Eveland, and A.S. Bean. 1976. Extending the Agricultural Extension Model. Stanford: Sanford University, Institute for Communication Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röling, N. 1982. Alternative Approaches to Extension. In Progress in Rural Extension and Community Development, ed. G. Jones and M. Rolls, vol. 1, 87–115. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1988. Extension Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roling, N. 2002. Beyond the Aggregation of Individual Preferences. Moving from Multiple to Distributed Cognition in Resource Dilemmas. In Wheelbarrows full of Frogs – Social Learning in Rural Resource Management: International Research and Reflections, ed. C. Leeuwis and R. Pyburn, 25–47. Assen: Van Gorcum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röling, N., and P. Engel. 1991. The Development of the Concept of Agricultural Knowledge and Information Systems (AKIS): Implications for Extension. In Agricultural Extension: Worldwide Institutional Evolution and Forces for Change, ed. W. Rivera and D. Gustafson, 125–139. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röling, N., and J. Jiggins. 1998. The Ecological Knowledge System. In Facilitating Sustainable Agriculture: Participatory Learning and Adaptive Management in Times of Environmental Uncertainty, ed. N. Röling and M.A.E. Wagemakers, 283–311. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röling, N., and E. van de Fliert. 1994. Transforming Extension for Sustainable Agriculture: the Case of Integrated Pest Management in Rice in Indonesia. Agriculture & Human Values 11: 96–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Röling, N., and Μ.A.E. Wagemakers, eds. 1998. Facilitating Sustainable Agriculture: Participatory Learning and Adaptive Management in times of Environmental Uncertainty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röling, N., J. Ascroft, and F.W. Chege. 1976. The Diffusion of Innovations and the Issue of Equity in Rural Development. In Communication and Development: Critical Perspectives, ed. E. Rogers, 63–79. Beverly Hills: Sage Publ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roxas, S.A., G. Piroli, and M. Sorrentino. 2011. Efficiency and Evaluation Analysis of a Network of Technology Transfer Brokers. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 23: 7–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savage, G., and C. Hilton. 2001. A Critical View of Facilitating Labor-Management Collaboration. Group Facilitation: A Research & Applications Journal 3: 47–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiere, J.B., J. Lyklema, J. Schakel, and K.G. Rickert. 1999. Evolution of Farming Systems and System Philosophy. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 16: 375–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scoones, I., and J. Thompson, eds. 1994. Beyond Farmer First. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea, B. 2011. A Decade of Knowledge Translation Research - What has Changed? Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 64: 3–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmonds, N.W. 1986. A Short Review of Farming Systems Research in the Tropics. Experimental Agriculture 22: 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SLIM. 2004. Facilitation in policy processes: developing new professional skills, Policy Briefing, no. 4, http://slim.open.ac.uk.

  • Somers, N. 1998. Learning About Sustainable Agriculture: the case of Dutch Arable Farmers. In Facilitating Sustainable Agriculture: Participatory Learning and Adaptive Management in Times of Environmental Uncertainty, ed. N. Röling and M.A.E. Wagemakers, 125–134. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sriskandarajah, N., M. Cerf, and E. Noe. 2006. Learning as a Process: Understanding One’s Role in the New Learning Demands of Multifunctional Land Use Systems, Working with Different Actors, Tools and Scales. In Changing European Farming Systems for a Better Future: New Visions for Rural Areas, ed. H. Langeveld and N. Röling, 27–28. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stetler, C.B., M.W. Legro, J. Rycroft-Malone, C. Bowman, G. Curran, M. Guihan, H. Hagedorn, S. Pineros, and C.M. Wallace. 2006. Role of “External Facilitation” in Implementation of Research Findings: A Qualitative Evaluation of Facilitation Experiences in the Veterans Health Administration. Implementation Science. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-1-23.

  • Suvinen, N., J. Konttinen, and M. Nieminen. 2010. How Necessary are Intermediary Organizations in the Commercialization of Research? European Planning Studies 18: 1365–1389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swaans, K., B. Boogaard, R. Bendapudi, H. Taye, S. Hendrickx, and L. Klerkx. 2014. Operationalizing Inclusive Innovation: Lessons from Innovation Platforms in Livestock Value Chains in India and Mozambique. Innovation and Development 4: 239–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, B., and J. Claar. 1984. The History and Development of Agricultural Extension. In Agricultural Extension: A Reference Manual, ed. B. Swanson, 1–19. Rome: FAO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Theodorakopoulos, N., D. Bennett, and D.J.S. Preciado. 2014. Intermediation for Technology Diffusion and User Innovation in a Developing Rural Economy: A Social Learning Perspective. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development: An International Journal 26: 645–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ban, A.W., and H.S. Hawkins. 1988. Agricultural Extension. Harlow: Longman Scientific and Technical.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A.H., D.E. Polley, R. Garud, and S. Venkataraman. 1999. The Innovation Journey. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Lente, H., M. Hekkert, R. Smits, and B. Van Waveren. 2003. Roles of Systemic Intermediaries in Transition Processes. International Journal of Innovation Management 7: 1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wals, A., ed. 2007. Social Learning Towards a Sustainable World. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webber, L. 1995. Participatory Rural Appraisal Design: Conceptual and Process Issues. Agricultural Systems 17: 107–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webler, T., H. Kastenholz, and O. Renn. 1995. Public Participation in Impact Assessment: A Social Learning Perspective. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 15: 443–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winch, G., and R. Courtney. 2007. The Organisation of Innovation Brokers: An International Review. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 19: 747–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodhill, J., and N. Röling. 1998. The second Wing of the Eagle: The Human Dimension in Learning Our Way to More Sustainable Futures. In Facilitating Sustainable Agriculture: Participatory Learning and Adaptive Management in Times of Environmental Uncertainty, ed. N. Röling and M.A.E. Wagemakers, 46–71. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. 2006. Enhancing Agricultural Innovation: How to go Beyond the Strengthening of Research Systems. Washington DC: The World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012. Agricultural Innovation Systems: An Investment Source Book. Washington: World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ye, J., and A. Kankanhalli. 2013. Exploring Innovation Through Open Networks: A Review and Initial Research Questions. IIMB Management Review 25: 69–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Agricultural University of Athens, Athens, Greece

    Alex Koutsouris

Authors
  1. Alex Koutsouris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alex Koutsouris .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA

    Nicholas Kalaitzandonakes

  2. Department of Information Systems and Technology Management, GWU School of Business, Washington, DC, USA

    Elias G. Carayannis

  3. School of Production Engineering & Management, Technical University of Crete, Chania, Crete, Greece

    Evangelos Grigoroudis

  4. Institute of Soil Science and Plant Cultivation, IUNG-PIB, Pulawy, Poland

    Stelios Rozakis

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Koutsouris, A. (2018). Role of Extension in Agricultural Technology Transfer: A Critical Review. In: Kalaitzandonakes, N., Carayannis, E., Grigoroudis, E., Rozakis, S. (eds) From Agriscience to Agribusiness. Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67958-7_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation