Ag extension system works, but co-ordination is a must

Research is one of the fundamental building blocks of a successful agriculture sector.

Any industry needs to stay on top of the latest production information if it is to keep moving forward, and agriculture is no exception.

Concerns have been raised over the years about specific gaps in research coverage, but generally speaking, the sector has been well-served in that area, whether it be the federal and provincial governments, post-secondary institutions, commodity groups, farmer-led organizations or private industry.

However, this research does no one any good if the final results are compiled into reports and tucked away on a shelf to collect dust.

In order for this research to have the desired effect, its findings must be passed on to farmers on the ground, where they can put them to work and reap the benefits.

This isn’t a new idea.

There was once a time when provincial governments employed “ag reps” across their provinces to provide face-to-face help for farmers.

That extensive network of extension staff began to be dismantled years ago, replaced by a more centralized collection of provincial specialists.

It was the same with the Prairies’ major agricultural universities. At one time, for example, the University of Saskatchewan had an actual extension department, whose only job was to transfer knowledge from its researchers to those who needed it, including farmers.

That department no longer exists.

Individual researchers still engage with farmers to talk about their work, but the system isn’t as formalized as it once was.

This is not to say that the results of agricultural research remain on the proverbial shelf.

The federal and provincial governments do continue this extension work with the resources they have, as do the universities and other post-secondary institutions that focus on agriculture research.

Commodity groups and farmer-led research organizations have also stepped in to fill the gaps, and they too make an effort to ensure that the practical results of this work make their way to farmers.

But this modern-day extension system has been called a “mish-mash,” particularly when compared to what happens in the United States, where land grant universities have a specific mandate to share the results of their research with state residents, including farmers.

For example, North Dakota State University has an agricultural extension rep in every one of the state’s counties. They in turn have access to regional specialists.

It’s an expensive system, but one that ensures farmers continue to receive face-to-face help when required.

There is no reason for Prairie farmers to despair. The piecemeal approach to agriculture extension that has evolved may not be perfect, but it appears to function well enough.

However, as those working in this field quickly acknowledge, a certain level of co-ordination between the various research players becomes necessary if this system is to work effectively.

Without a central organization to direct traffic, such as the universities in the U.S., costly duplication of effort could result.

Canada’s patchwork of agriculture research and extension could quickly deteriorate into a hodgepodge of efforts that waste time and resources.

Members of the Prairie research community recognize this and take steps to co-ordinate their work.

These efforts must continue and intensify to ensure that knowledge transfer produces what in the end we all want — a thriving agricultural sector that is able to support the Canadian economy and feed the world.

Karen Briere, Bruce Dyck, Robin Booker, Paul Yanko and Laura Rance collaborate in the writing of Western Producer editorials.

Source: producer.com