Review and Recommendations

for Strengthening the

Agricultural Extension System
in Ethiopia

20 August 2009

The IFPRI Team

Kristin Davis
Burton Swanson
David Amudavi
Table of contents
Section Page

Executive summary 1

Introduction 9

Methods 13

Background on agricultural extension in Ethiopia 18

Strengthening and transforming the Ethiopian extension system 33

Agricultural Technical and Vocational Education and Training 62

The enabling environment 74

Issues and trade-offs in system sustainability 82

Recommendations and implementation 93

Appendix 106

This report was commissioned by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation at the
request of the government of Ethiopia. The authors are solely responsible for the
findings and conclusions contained in the report.

The authors would like to thank the McKinsey & Company team for their
analytical support and assistance.

A full list of abbreviations has been included in the appendix for the reader’s
convenience.
Executive summary

CONTEXT FOR THE STUDY

Eighty-three percent of the population depends directly on agriculture for their
livelihoods, while many others depend on agriculture-related cottage industries
such as textiles, leather, and food oil processing. Agriculture contributes 46.3
percent of gross domestic product (GDP) (World Bank Group 2008), and up to
90 percent of total export earnings.

As part of the current five-year (2006-2011) Plan for Accelerated and Sustained
Development to End Poverty (PASDEP), the government is continuing to invest
heavily in agriculture. The basic direction of agricultural development includes
the utilization of human labor, proper use of agricultural land, the combining of
endogenous and exogenous knowledge (a “foot on land”); focus on innovations
adapted to agro-ecological zones; and an integrated development approach. The
MOARD has aligned donor support with plans to scale activities in the sector
and to meet the resource gaps identified. A core part of the government’s
investment in agriculture is the public agricultural extension system.

In early 2009, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) was requested by
the Government of Ethiopia (GOE) to undertake a review of agricultural
extension in the country. The purpose was to provide a review of the strengths
and constraints of the public extension system, and to give suggestions on “best
fit” solutions and their scale-up opportunities, in close consultation with the
government and other stakeholders.

A team of extension scholars and international management experts conducted a

review of the Ethiopian extension system from May-July, 2009. The review used
a variety of analytical tools to develop the overall findings, including extensive
field visits to 6 of 9 regions in Ethiopia; interviews with 100+ extension
personnel, extension experts, nongovernment organization (NGO) groups,
government representatives, farmer and farmer groups; and a holistic literature
review on Ethiopian extension.

Stakeholder review and inputs were critical to the creation of this report and its
findings. International and local extension experts and stakeholders were
consulted on several occasions, including a briefing at the start of the review
period to gather data and test in-going hypotheses, and at the conclusion of the

1
formal review period. The team also held a three day stakeholder workshop that
gathered feedback and ideas from a group of over 80 parliamentarians, MOARD
staff, and front-line extension personnel. The insights generated from these
various stakeholder meetings were instrumental in developing the findings and
recommendations of this work.

EXTENSION ASSESSMENT FINDINGS

The study assessed strengths and constraints in the field-level extension system,
the agricultural technical and vocational education and training (ATVET)
system, and the extension institutional environment. The study also briefly
considered the overall enabling environment within which extension operates.
High-level findings are presented below, with extensive detail provided in the
main report.

Findings at field-extension level

The field-extension service has a strong foundation of Farmer Training Centers
(FTCs) and trained Development Agents (DAs) already in place in the field.
Roughly 8,500 FTCs have been created throughout Ethiopia, and about 63,000
DAs have been trained in total, with a reported 45,000 staffed on location.
Woreda and regional offices are adequately staffed. DAs and woreda staff have
strong technical skills, and are generally trained as specialists. Pockets of
entrepreneurialism and innovations exist in specific FTCs and woredas.

Acknowledging these strengths, several sets of constraints were identified within

the field-level extension system that will require attention. These constraints
show great variance by region, with some regions employing good practices
while others lag behind in implementation of proper extension approaches. Basic
infrastructure and resources at FTC and woreda level remains a major constraint,
particularly related to operating funds: the vast majority of FTCs and kebeles do
not have operating equipment or inputs to pursue typical extension activities on
the demonstration farm. There are major “soft” skill gaps for DAs and SMSs in
the FTC and woreda, and their ability to serve farmers is limited given a lack of
practical skills. Finally, the overall field-level system is often limited in its ability
to meet farmer needs and demands; mechanisms to make it more farmer-driven
and market-oriented would yield greater results.

2
Findings at ATVET level
The team employed a similar approach at the ATVET level to identify strengths
and constraints. Strengths at ATVET level include a strong record of training
broad groups of DAs, a strong technical curriculum, and some pockets of
innovation and practical training, including linkages to markets and farmers.

Constraints include limited success in enabling DAs to gain practical experience,

particularly related to their internships at woreda level, limited linkages to
broader educational system and research system in Ethiopia, and general lack of
resources to effectively transmit fully required skill-set to DAs.

Findings at enabling environment level

The country-wide enabling environment in which extension operates is critical to
extension efforts. Various aspects of the enabling environment were considered,
including seed and other inputs, water management, and credit systems, as well
as producer groups. Constraints were also assessed, leading to the conclusion that
the enabling environment requires strengthening, particularly in the areas of seed,
market access, and credit, if extension is to achieve its full potential impact.

SUSTAINABILITY CONSIDERATIONS
The team recognized extension system sustainability as an overarching challenge
to address in the review. The report offers specific considerations for
sustainability in the short and long term.

In the short term, the GOE will need to manage sustainability at the FTC level
through improved resource efficiency. This paper proposes that the GOE
introduce responsibly administered revenue-generating activities at appropriate
FTCs (already being pursued in some innovative woredas) that can provide
additional funds for operational resources and practical demonstration of
effective farming practices. The legal framework to support this approach will
need to be developed, but has some precedent in Ethiopia’s teaching sector.

In the longer term, the extension system in Ethiopia will need to continue to
evolve to meet the needs of its farmers and achieve an appropriate level of
sustainability. Other developing nation experience (e.g., India and China) gives
examples for how the extension system might be expected to evolve in the future.
Three particular changes – greater emergence of fee-for-service extension (e.g.
for artificial insemination); new actors, including private-sector participation in

3
extension; and changes in broader enabling environment – will impact and
supplement the overall public extension system’s delivery of services in the
future. In the near term, however, government-led public extension will need to
continue to play the primary role. These changes have the potential to strengthen
the overall extension system and allow for public extension to focus on areas
where it is most needed in a sustainable fashion.

RECOMMENDATIONS
The team has developed a set of recommendations and potential change actions
across the extension system. Taken as a whole, these recommendations represent
a cohesive set of actions that can be pursued to strengthen the Ethiopian
extension system. The broad set of recommendations covers seven distinct
themes, each impacting an important aspect of the extension system:

1) Strengthening farmer-driven orientation across all levels of extension

The overall management and orientation of the extension system must be driven
by farmer needs, from the types of services offered at the FTC to the overall
strategic direction set by regional and federal policy makers. A farmer-driven
orientation ensures that the extension system is serving farmers in their areas of
highest need and allows for the regional and woreda-level flexibility required in
an agricultural system as variable as Ethiopia. While a policy of decentralization
has been followed by the MOARD, the implementation has not yet been
consistent across all regions and more could be done to increase the voice of the
farmer in the system.

2) Broadening of extension services offered

This report has described in depth the great variation in services required by the
farmers, pastoralists, agro-pastoralists, women, and youth of Ethiopia. Extension
will need to broaden services to meet the subject-area needs for all these groups,
particularly as incomes continue to grow and more farmers seek to emulate
emerging “model” farmers, demanding information on a more diverse range of
crop (including cash crop) and livestock subjects.

3) Resourcing FTCs for farmer impact and sustainability

The current resourcing levels of FTCs will need to be strengthened in order to

have greater farmer impact – both capital resources such as adequate buildings
and demonstration plots as well as the operating capacity of the FTC to provide

4
farmer demonstrations. Recommendations include an increased focus on
sustainability activities (e.g., increasing responsibly administered revenue-
generating demonstrations and potential for financially sound loans and micro-
loans for operational activities) at the FTC level.

4) Improving DA knowledge and capabilities

DAs represent the front line of Ethiopian extension, and as such their own
capabilities and knowledge to serve farmers is of the utmost importance.
Recommendations such as strengthening the DA education system and providing
in-service training courses on specific topics as demanded by farmers will ensure
that the system continues to serve farmers effectively.

5) Improving DA motivation and retention

Strong DA motivation to serve farmers is critical to the delivery of knowledge to

farmers, and field experiences show that the DA’s impact on the system
strengthens as tenure increases. Recommendations that improve the DA
experience (e.g., messaging and support from woreda and MOARD that focus on
important nature of DA services, development of a clear DA career path)
strengthen the overall implementation of extension services at farmer level.

6) Implementing performance culture and transparency at all levels of extension

Several recommendations identified as critical to increasing farmer impact (e.g.,

identifying metrics to track impact at FTC level) relate to the need for an overall
performance culture transformation in the system. An increased focus on
understanding the extension system’s impact and improvements in extension
reward systems can go a long way in pushing extension to be high-performing
and impact driven. The government’s recent effort to implement BPR has
brought a renewed sense of performance orientation to certain areas, but much
more can be done.

7) Improving linkages throughout the system

This report recognizes the importance of a system-wide approach to extension.

Recommendations focused on linkages between extension actors (e.g.,
strengthening ties between DA and SMS through woreda extension resource
centers (WERC)) to strengthen the overall system approach and ensure that all
actors are working together to reach extension’s common goal. Specifically, the
linkage between extension and research needs to be improved so that farmers can
receive critical information and support in a timely manner and research efforts

5
are tied to farmer needs. It is also important to note strategic linkages with non-
extension actors (NGOs, private sector entities) that impact how farmers are
served through the system.

Each recommendation theme has corresponding activities as illustrated in

Exhibit 1 below and detailed in the main report.

EXHIBIT 1. The recommendations are represented by 7 themes

Themes Activities
Strengthening farmer-driven orientation ▪ 1.1- Ensure farmer-driven alignment across all levels of
across all levels of extension extension policy
▪ 1.2- Strengthen farmer-led decision making at FTC
▪ 2.1- Increase/ expand focus on cash crops, other income-
Broadening of extension services focused products at farm level
offered ▪ 2.2- Increase focus on marginalized groups (e.g. women)

Resourcing FTCs for farmer impact and ▪ 3.1- Resource FTCs to basic functioning level
sustainability ▪ 3.2- Utilize credit to strengthen operations at FTC
▪ 3.3- Strategically invest in add-on resources, innovations
▪ 4.1- Offer in-service training for DA skill building
Strengthening DA knowledge and ▪ 4.2- Re-structure and strengthen ATVET system, curriculum
capabilities ▪ 4.3- Revise/ strengthen DA apprenticeship/ practical program

Improving DA motivation and retention ▪ 5.1- Implement DA, SMS career path
▪ 5.2- Revise/ tailor DA staffing for placement, timing in FTC
▪ 5.3- Incorporate big picture thinking into extension system
Implementing performance culture and ▪ 6.1- Launch performance mgmt program across all extension
transparency across system levels with target setting and tracking programs
▪ 6.2-Develop reward system for DA, SMS, FTC, decided based
on performance metrics and farmer input/ feedback
▪ 7.1- Develop Woreda Resource Centers to provide adequate
Improving linkages throughout the linkage and information opportunities for DAs and SMS
extension system
▪ 7.2- Foster improved linkages between research, ATVETs, on-
the-ground extension through site visits, farmer meetings, etc

The report recommends activities be sequenced across three horizons:

▪ Horizon 1 activities are “must-do” initiatives that spur basic extension

system effectiveness in the short-term – in essence those actions and
recommendations that are of the highest priority and can have the highest
impact on Ethiopian extension in the near term. Some of these activities
require action from the Government of Ethiopia and MOARD; others will
have a partnership focus with donor organizations that are active in
agriculture.
▪ Horizon 2 activities push the extension system to a higher level of efficacy,
building on the basic functionality that is achieved through horizon one
activities. These activities are not as urgent or immediately impactful as

6
 those activities in horizon one, but they will still need to be implemented to
have a fully functioning extension system and should be pursued as soon as
possible in order to get the full impact of extension.
▪ Horizon 3 activities strengthen the effectiveness and sustainability of the
Ethiopian extension system as it grows and develops. These activities
should be pursued after the extension reaches the next level of efficacy, as
these activities will have a multiplying effect on activities that have already
been implemented.
The breakdown of activities across horizons is represented in Exhibit 2 below.

EXHIBIT 2. The recommendations have been prioritized across

three implementation horizons

Horizon 3 – Next-phase activities

that will increase system
Horizon 2 – Actions that elevate effectiveness and sustainability
the system to higher performance
Horizon 1 – Must-dos to set up level
system for success and create
basic effectiveness

Highest
▪ 1.1, 5.3 Refine vision and ▪ 4.2 Restructure ATVET ▪ 3.3 Scale up innovation
mission for extension education system experiments to all FTCs
priority
▪ 1.2 Establish farmer-led decision ▪ 5.1 Develop DA/SMS career ▪ 3.3 Invest strategic resources to
making at FTC path lower cost of extension
▪ 2.1, 2.2, 4.1 Expand DA skill set ▪ 5.2 Revise DA staffing ▪ 6.1 Launch team to develop
for market-driven activities practices performance management system
▪ 3.1 Ensure FTC upgrade
resources are slated in
upcoming donor programs
▪ 3.2 Encourage FTC revenue
generation through loan program

Lower
▪ N/A ▪ 4.2, 5.3 Create extension ▪ 6.2 Develop performance rewards
awareness campaign for Das and SMS
priority
▪ 4.3 Strengthen practical ▪ 7.2 Foster greater linkages
portion of DA training
▪ 7.1 Develop Woreda Resource
Centres to build linkages

Innovative experiments should be launched across horizons and content areas to test implementation
Innovations
strategies and discover best fit solutions

Activities and primary actors are described in detail within the report. We
conclude the report with a “near-term” checklist for the MOARD, with activities
designed to gain momentum on areas of critical importance.

For implementation to be successful, a range of actors including the GOE, the

Ministry of Agriculture, the donor and NGO community, and the private sector
will need to work together to implement the various components and programs.
Ultimately, the transformational change required for greater extension impact

7
will need to come from within Ethiopia – from farmers and DAs at the front line
of extension to the highest policy makers.

As the report describes, much work has been accomplished with regard to
extension in Ethiopia. However, much more remains to be done. We are
therefore excited about the potential impact that further strengthening the
extension system will have on the men and women farmers across Ethiopia,
impact that both helps to maintain national food security while at the same time
increases farm income to improve rural livelihoods.

8
1. Introduction
Eighty-three percent of the population of Ethiopia depends directly on agriculture
for their livelihoods, while many others depend on agriculture-related cottage
industries such as textiles, leather, and food oil processing. Agriculture
contributes 46.3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), and up to 90 percent
of foreign export earnings.

On the whole, Ethiopia has ample resources for agriculture. Ethiopia has
111.5 million hectares of land. Whereas it has 74 million ha of total land arable,
only 13 million ha are being used.1 Water resources are also plentiful in much of
the country. There are about 12 million farmer households providing human
resources. Ethiopia’s livestock resources are among the top in the world, at least
in terms of quantity.2 The country also has a high amount of biodiversity, with
several different economically important crops indigenous to the country (e.g.,
teff).

In spite of these resources, many challenges confront policymakers and other

agents of change. These include the growing demand for food and products to
feed nearly 80 million people; the growing income gap between urban and rural
areas; dwindling natural resources; and poverty and food insecurity (it is
estimated that some 6.4 million people required emergency assistance in late
20083, and 7.5 million people are chronically food-insecure and must receive
assistance through a social welfare scheme4).

The agriculture sector – and institutions that support it such as extension – is thus
key to poverty reduction in Ethiopia. Beginning in 1992 with the Maputo
Declaration, the Government of Ethiopia (GOE) began an unprecedented public
investment in the agricultural sector. At a time when many governments in
Africa curtailed support to the agricultural sector, the GOE instituted a policy of
Agricultural Development-led Industrialization (ADLI). In 2008, 16 percent of
the government budget was committed to the agricultural sector. In recent years,
high rates of economic growth have been linked to increases in area cultivated
and agricultural productivity (Byerlee et al. 2007; Diao et al. 2007).

As part of the current five-year (2006-2011) Plan for Accelerated and Sustained
Development to End Poverty (PASDEP), the government is continuing to invest
heavily in agriculture. To enable this, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development (MOARD) has developed a document outlining rural development
policies, strategies, and instruments (MOARD 2001). The basic direction of

9
agricultural development includes the utilization of human labor, proper use of
agricultural land, the combining of endogenous and exogenous knowledge (a
“foot on land”); focus on innovations adapted to agro-ecological zones; and an
integrated development approach. The MOARD has aligned donor support with
plans to scale activities in the sector and to meet the resource gaps identified. A
core part of the government’s investment in agriculture is the public agricultural
extension system.

Ethiopia’s achievements in rural development and extension as a result of this

commitment and strategy include increased “modernization” and revitalization of
agriculture through improved and new crops, livestock, and natural resource
management (NRM) technologies. They also include the increase in input use by
farmers. Use of improved seed varieties is on the rise, although the supply
remains a bottleneck in the system. The professional capacity of extension has
also dramatically increased; over 63,000 development agents (DAs) have
graduated from the agricultural technical and vocational education and training
(ATVET) colleges in the past six years with three-year diplomas (prior to 2000,
the existing 15,000 DAs had about nine months’ training).

However, while there have been great strides in agriculture, productivity remains
low relative to potential yields. Compounding this, inputs are scarce and
expensive, and market and credit access are extremely limited. Within extension,
the dramatic changes in government policy over three eras of governments, each
pursuing a different policy agenda, have affected its efficacy. Even within the
current system of government, there has been a tremendous amount of
restructuring. The ongoing business process reengineering (BPR) is the latest in a
long line of substantial changes within government ministries.

Thus in spite of recent successes achieved through extension, there are also
constraints and gaps. There are many ways to continually make improvements to
support the country’s agricultural goals, including moving beyond a staple crop
production focus; increasing farmer participation; developing capacity at the
decentralized level; improving links to and creating space for other innovation
system players such as farmer groups, research, the private sector, and civil
society; giving due attention to women farmers and pastoralists; and increased
focus on marketing, high-value crops, and related inputs.

To help improve the agricultural extension system, the Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation (BMGF) was requested by the GOE to undertake a review of
agricultural extension in the country. The purpose was to provide a review of the

10
strengths and constraints of the public extension system and to give suggestions
on “best fit” solutions, in close consultation with the government and other
stakeholders.

Four major programmatic components of the Ethiopian extension system were

examined. These include:

1. Participatory Demonstration and Training Extension System

(PADETES) (EEA 2006). In 1995, the government introduced PADETES, a
system that now reaches some 35 to 40 percent of farm households in rural
areas. The PADETES provides a small amount of inputs through packages
provided directly to farm households, and functions with a low number of
visits by public DAs.
2. Farmer Training Centers (FTCs). Since 2002, roughly 8,500 FTCs have
been built at the kebele (the lowest administrative division) level. The centers
are staffed by DAs and are responsible for providing extension activities in
rural areas. Core activities are around livestock, crop production, and NRM.
3. Agricultural Technical and Vocational Education. In 2000, the
government invested in agricultural and technical vocational education and
training (ATVET) centers to train DAs charged with carrying out agricultural
extension activities with farm households. By the close of 2008, the program
had trained over 63,000 DAs at the diploma level.
4. Institutional coordination. The rapid expansion of the extension system has
brought with it an administrative model to support an extensive set of
responsibilities, adapting to 32 agro-ecological zones and to support a DA
corps of over 60,000.
The report is organized as follows. Section 2 describes how the review was
undertaken. Section 3 gives background on agriculture and extension in Ethiopia,
giving a summary of previous studies and focusing on the current PADETES
extension system, as well as providing information on how to transform
extension systems. Section 4 provides an overall assessment at the field level of
the Ethiopian extension system, looking specifically at strengths and constraints
of the system at the regional/zonal, woreda, and kebele levels. Section 5
describes the training program for DAs through the ATVET system. Section 6
covers the enabling environment and its importance for extension to work
effectively and efficiently. Section 7 describes alternative methods and
approaches for system sustainability and “best fit” solutions to address
constraints found in the system. Finally, section 8 provides the overall set of

11
recommendations and implementation guidelines for strengthening and
improving the Ethiopian extension system.

Note to the reader: Ethiopia’s diverse agro-ecological zones mandate a range of

farming systems, with crop farmers, mixed crop and livestock farmers,
pastoralists, and agro-pastoralists all participating in the agriculture system.
This report will use the term “farmer” to encompass this diverse set of actors
and the institutions that serve them; for example, Farmer Training Center
encompasses the range of centers built, which include those built for pastoralists.
The team explicitly notes that extension must be available to serve farmers of all
types.

12
2. Methods
The BMGF contracted a team of extension scholars and international
management experts to conduct a full review on the Ethiopian extension system.
Throughout the review, MOARD management provided consistent support,
oversight, and input. BMGF also provided support in the study. As a part of the
process, the review team engaged a wide set of stakeholders, including the
Ethiopian Development Research Institute (EDRI), Ethiopian Economic
Association (EEA)/Ethiopian Economic Policy Research Institute (EEPRI), and
relevant local institutions; bi/multilateral donors; NGOs; and national agricultural
universities.

DATA COLLECTION METHODS EMPLOYED

Methods used to collect information for the study included a desk review of
relevant literature, including successful case studies from several Asian
countries; informant interviews; stakeholder consultations; focus groups; and
field visits to six of the nine regions of Ethiopia. A pre-test of data collection
instruments was also conducted in Addis Ababa and the Oromiya Region. More
details on the interviews and data sources can be found in the appendix.

A significant component of the study was the field visits to the regions (Exhibit 3
shows a map of Ethiopia). Six regions and nine woredas were identified by
criteria to cover a diverse set of agro-ecologies, regions, and production systems
with the time and personnel available, and to reflect a wide range of local
extension and ATVET experiences. In each region, the team interviewed farmer
and farmer groups, regional heads, office heads, Subject Matter Specialists
(SMSs), and DAs,. At the ATVETs, the team interviewed administrators,
instructors, and students. The regions covered were:

▪ Afar Region: Semera Town, Gewane Town, and Assayita woreda

▪ Amhara Region: Bahir Dar Town and Bure and Dejen woredas
▪ Benishangul-Gumuz Region: Assosa Town and Assosa woreda
▪ Oromia Region: Addis Ababa City, Assela Town, and Tiyo and Chiro
woredas
▪ Southern Nations, Nationalities, and People’s Region (SNNPR): Hawassa
City and Dilla Zuria woreda

13
▪ Tigray Region: Mekelle City and Wukro and Atsibi woredas
EXHIBIT 3. Map of Ethiopia showing the major regions and regional capitals

Source: Ethiopia Strategy Support Project

The reviewers also documented complementary programs and projects that

interact with the public extension system. For instance, the International
Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) has a country-wide project called Improving
Productivity and Market Success (IPMS). The goal of IPMS is to bring about
increased uptake and impact of technologies for smallholder farmers and
pastoralists in Ethiopia to accelerate market-oriented agricultural development
(ILRI and MOARD 2005). In addition, MOARD’s Rural Capacity Building
Project (RCBP) is working throughout the country and focusing on certain
woredas and is strengthening ATVETs (Kreuchauf 2008). The RCBP was
initiated under the MOARD, focusing on capacity building of human resources
in extension (ATVETs); supporting FTCs with physical infrastructure;
agricultural research; and institutional capacity building. RCBP woredas that
were covered in this review included Assayita woreda in Afar, Bure (also IPMS)
and Dejen woredas in Amhara, Wukro and Atsibi woredas in Tigray, and Tiyo in
Oromia.

14
Finally, the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) is developing an
initiative to aggregate the crops, seed, policy, soil health, and markets programs
for four major “bread basket” regions in Ethiopia. While the project is still under
discussion with the Ethiopian Institute for Agricultural Research (EIAR), the
team had conversations with the lead EIAR researchers to find out more about
the upcoming initiative and to discuss extension’s role in Ethiopian agriculture.

ANALYTICAL METHODS AND APPROACHES

The team employed different analytical approaches to identify the strengths and
weaknesses of the Ethiopian extension system. Building on quantitative and
qualitative data gathered in the field, the team employed a systems analysis
across four major components of the extension system.

EXHIBIT 4. Systems framework for extension analysis

System objectives Inputs Outputs Impacts

The team also employed an additional analytical lens to the findings based on
private sector experiences in transformational change programs. This framework,
designed to analyze strengths and weaknesses of a transformation change
program like an extension system, allowed the team to analyze the different
working components of Ethiopian extension as they related to systems and
management, knowledge and capabilities, and infrastructure and resources. This

15
approach also introduced the concept of the enabling environment in which
extension operates, which the team briefly analyzed.

Beyond the strengths and constraints analyses completed by the team, “best fit”
solutions in extension were identified that could be applied and scaled in the
Ethiopian extension system. Many of these best-fit solutions came from specific
regions, woredas, and kebeles the team visited; these best-fit solutions were
enriched by the team’s knowledge and experiences of other country extension
systems.

These analyses led to the development of a broad set of recommendations

designed to strengthen the current Ethiopian extension system, building on the
current foundation and addressing the major constraints identified by the team.
The team developed an initial findings document and slide presentation for
syndication with the broader stakeholder community.

This report was presented to the MOARD for professionals and experts to
provide comments. The team continued to receive feedback on the write-up by
regular briefings with MOARD staff, cross-checking with local experts, and by
team meetings. A draft copy of the report was circulated to MOARD staff and
bureau heads for comments. In addition, stakeholder consultations continued.
The findings were presented at the annual meeting of the EEA, and feedback
from academics was incorporated into the report. A follow-up consultation to
gather feedback was held with a panel of Ethiopian extension experts and
scholars who had briefed the team at the beginning of the study.

Following various reviews, a stakeholder meeting was held for extension

personnel, researchers, NGOs, and policy makers to validate and refine the
findings and recommendations for the final version of the report. The purpose of
this was to ensure that there was wide stakeholder agreement on the way
forward. In this regard, the team held a 2-1/2 day workshop in Adama with DAs,
SMSs, regional bureau heads, extension heads, MOARD staff, research staff,
ATVET heads, and Sasakawa-Global 2000 staff to brief them on the findings and
get feedback and validation, and to go into detail with these stakeholders on how
to actually operationalize the recommendations.

These stakeholder meetings were critical in helping the team to refine the
findings and develop recommendations that were “best fit” for the Ethiopian
context. In particular, stakeholder and expert feedback on the Ethiopian enabling
environment, DA motivation and retention practices, the need for a “system-
wide” view of extension, and role of the generalist versus specialist DA in

16
extension led to specific findings and recommendations that strengthen the
report. A high-level summary of stakeholder feedback is included in the
appendix.

In sum, the study review attempted to ensure rigor and reliability of results
through covering a wide range of geographic locations, by speaking with a wide
range of stakeholders (including the private and civil society sectors), through
triangulation of data sources, and by continual feedback from the MOARD, a
panel of Ethiopian development experts, and other stakeholders.

17
3. Background on agricultural extension
in Ethiopia
This section provides detail on the history of agricultural extension in Ethiopia
and the current extension system. Key lessons from alternative extension
approaches are shared that inform the overall study.

REVIEW OF EXTENSION MODELS IN ETHIOPIA

This study builds on previous recommendations and reviews of the Ethiopian
extension system (current and past models). Because there are several excellent
reviews of past Ethiopian extension systems already existing (see Abate 2007;
EEA/EEPRI 2006; Kelemework 2007), this paper just touches briefly on the
various systems and programs of government extension in Ethiopia. (See
appendix for an annotated bibliography detailing the various papers and studies
reviewed and additional findings from this extensive literature review).

Ethiopia has had government agricultural extension services since the 1950s,
when a model similar to the United States Land Grant approach was used, where
universities reached out to communities with research-based knowledge and
through adult education. The Imperial Ethiopian College of Agriculture and
Mechanical Arts (IECAMA) provided extension services in addition to research
and teaching.

In 1963, the Ministry of Agriculture was established, and the mandate of

extension provision was transferred to this institution. The Ministry of
Agriculture established extension departments at the headquarters and provincial
levels (Abate 2007).

During this time, there were several national development plans devised, the last
of which supported small-scale farmers through comprehensive package
programs (Comprehensive Integrated Package Projects or CIPPs), the most
prominent of which were the Chilalo and Wolayita Agricultural Development
Units (CADU and WADU). CADU was established in Arsi to improve living
standards through increased production and infrastructure. The WADU program,
based in Wolayita, while still focused on improving living standards, based its
approach on agro-ecological zones (Abate 2007).

18
A minimum package (Minimum Package Program – MPP1 and MPP2) approach
then followed these programs, to help to scale up the CIPPs. MPP1 lasted from
about 1971-1975. The country then moved into a socialist period. During this
time the government implemented the “quasi-participatory extension
approaches” and continued with the MPP2 program until 1985. Much of the
focus during this time was on land reform. The MPP2 program ended around
1985 (Abate 2007).

From around 1986-1995, there were various new programs, such as the National
Program for Food Self Sufficiency (1986-89), Modified Training and Visit
(T&V) Approach, and the Peasant Agriculture Development Extension Projects
(PADEPs) (1986-1995) (Abate 2007). Following the downfall of the socialist
regime in 1991, the focus changed to a free market economy.

In 1993, NGO Sasakawa Global 2000 (SG-2000) promoted the use of

productivity-enhancing technologies and access to inputs and credit, coupled
with training using 1/4- to 1/2-ha demonstration plots that were closely
supervised by research and extension. SG-2000’s goal was to increase food
production and stimulate links between research and extension. Via their on-farm
demonstration plots, SG-2000 showed that – with sufficient inputs and
supervision and management – farmers could double or triple their cereal yields
of maize and wheat.

The success of the SG-2000 pilots led in 1995 to the transitional government
adopting the PADETES for extension. This was based in part on the T&V system
as well the SG-2000 pilots. This falls under the National Extension Intervention
Program (NEIP) strategy. The goal of PADETES is to improve incomes via
increasing productivity, ensure self-sufficiency in food production, establish
farmer organizations, increase production of export crops, conserve natural
resources, and increase women’s participation in development.

PADETES uses a similar approach to SG-2000 together with a modified T&V

approach, but extended the technology package to livestock, high value crops,
post-harvest technologies, and agro-forestry. PADETES also uses a menu-based
approach rather than the former package approach.

The PADETES program had a massive increase in the number of adopting

farmers, from 35,000 in the beginning to over 3.6 million. This program was
closely monitored by the government. However, the high levels of maize
growers, coupled with a bumper crop in 2001/02, led to a massive oversupply
accompanied by a huge drop in maize prices. The realization set in that other

19
issues such as marketing and capacity had to be dealt with in addition to inputs
and production. In addition, it became apparent that the yields on the upscaled
plots were not as high as the original demonstration plots, due in part to a lack of
sufficient supervision by the extension staff.

Identifying challenges in the PADETES program resulting from insufficient

extension staff, the government realized the need for additional human resources
in extension to continue to bring about high rates of adoption and production.
The plan to use the technical and vocational education and training centers
(TVETS) to produce additional development agents was undertaken.

FTCs at the kebele level were also identified as a critical resource needed to
enable extension delivery. The FTCs were designed as local-level focal points for
farmers to receive information, training, demonstrations, and advice, and
included both classrooms and demonstration fields. They are expected to form an
important node between extension and farmers in the agricultural sector. FTCs
are managed at the kebele level, but capital, operational, and salary costs come
from the woreda level.

Each FTC is to be staffed by three DAs (one each in the areas of crops, livestock,
and natural resource management) and supported by a peripatetic DA covering
three FTCs and trained in cooperatives management or a related field (Spielman
et al. 2006). Each DA is expected to train 120 farmers per year in his/her field of
specialization. He or she is also expected to give modular training to 60 farmers
every six months in his/her field of specialization (Ministry of Agriculture and
Rural Development 2007).

Related to this massive scale-up of human and infrastructure resources for

agriculture, in 2007, the RCBP was initiated under the MOARD. The RCBP
focuses on capacity building of human resources in extension (ATVETs);
supporting farmer training centers (FTCs) with physical infrastructure;
agricultural research; and institutional capacity building. The RCBP also has
been implementing institutional innovations such as decentralization and
participatory financing mechanisms in a few select woredas.

Other projects such as IPMS are also supporting local extension in selected areas.
The project works in 10 Pilot Learning Sites (PLS) to develop a community-
based market-oriented agricultural program. This program will help to facilitate
access to agricultural innovations (technologies, policies, and processes) and to
strengthening the capacity of institutions to better serve farmers and
communities. Particular attention will be given to farmers and communities

20
around FTCs that are located in the farming systems for which the market
priorities are identified (IPMS 2005).

TODAY’S INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT

Various actors and institutions play important roles in today’s extension system.
Major government ministries concerned with or affecting agricultural and rural
development include:

▪ MOARD. The MOARD is responsible for developing and refining the

overall national agricultural and rural development strategies and policies
for the country, with input from the regions and other stakeholders. Within
this overall strategy, the MOARD establishes the overall national extension
policy, providing primary financial support for the extension system and
backstopping to the regions in terms of training and other capacity-
strengthening activities.
Several agencies sit beneath the MOARD:
– The Agricultural Marketing and Inputs Sector, the Natural Resources
sector, and the Agricultural Development Sector. In turn, the Agricultural
Extension Department, and the Training and Vocational Education
Department, fall under the Agricultural Development Sector.
– The semi-autonomous EIAR, which has the mandate to generate,
develop, and adapt agricultural technologies that focus on overall
development and needs of users (Beintema and Solomon 2003). EIAR is
responsible for coordination of decentralized agricultural research
activities at federal and regional research centers, and through higher
education institutions, including 7 regional and 15 federal agricultural
research institutes (Beintema and Solomon 2003; Spielman et al. 2007). It
operates at the federal and regional levels and accounts for two-thirds of
total spending and staff (Beintema and Solomon 2003). The EIAR is
among several institutes conducting agricultural research; in the late
1990s there were 41 agencies engaged in research (Beintema and
Solomon 2003).
▪ Other Ministries such as: the Ministry of Technology and Industry, the
Ministry of Capacity Building (www.mocb.gov.et), the Ministry of
Education, Ministry of Health, and the Ministry of Transportation and

21
 Communications (http://www.motac.gov.et). All finances are handled by the
Ministry of Finance and Economic Development (www.mofead.org).
▪ The Food Security Coordination Bureau (FCSB) is another important rural
institution. It classifies all woredas in Ethiopia as food-secure or food-
insecure due to the chronic problems of food security in the country. The
Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP), one of the largest social protection
programs in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), works with the chronically food
insecure woredas (Gilligan et al. 2008).
▪ Regional, woreda, and kebele institutions:
– Each region has a Bureau of Agriculture and Rural Development
(BOARD). The regions and their BOARDs are responsible for agriculture
and rural development policy implementation, coordination, and
evaluation. Each BOARD has a director and a number of technical and
administrative staff, including department heads. These personnel provide
technical and administrative backstopping, as well as supervision and
monitoring for the woreda- and kebele-level extension offices. Each
region is divided into major agro-ecological zones, which provide more
detailed technical and administrative support, especially for the large
regions. Some regions, such as SNNPR, which has many different
languages and ethnic groups, use zonal administration more than others.
– Under the regions are the woreda Offices of Agriculture and Rural
Development (OOARDs). The OOARDs are composed of five main
sectors: agricultural development, natural resources, environmental
protection and land administration, water supply and rural roads, and
input supply and cooperative promotion (Gebremedhin et al. 2007). The
largest sector, agricultural development, is responsible for extension
services and is usually divided into crop production, livestock production,
NRM, and extension teams (Gebremedhin et al. 2007). The OOARD
represent a more operational level in terms of reaching smallholder men
and women farmers and pastoralists. They do so using a cadre of experts
or SMS (who are also found at the regional level).
– At the kebele level are the FTCs, at which are posted 3 DAs.
▪ Other institutions at the woreda and kebele level include farmers’
cooperatives for input supply or marketing; community-based organizations;
NGOs; and private firms (e.g., traders or transporters) (see sidebar, Other
actors influencing extension in Ethiopia).

22
OTHER ACTORS INFLUENCING EXTENSION IN ETHIOPIA
In the private sector, domestic and foreign firms, small-scale rural
entrepreneurs, traders, transporters, and industry associations are emerging
as a potentially important force in the country. Private investment as a
percentage of GDP in Ethiopia has risen significantly, as has domestic
lending to the private sector. Between 1992 and 2004, 614 domestic firms
and 23 foreign firms invested approximately US$310 million in the agriculture
sector.
Cooperatives and unions provide a wide variety of services, including input
supply management, grain marketing, and the supply of consumer goods to
members at prices that compete with local traders. Some cooperatives are
also involved in seed multiplication and distribution schemes, grain milling,
distribution of veterinary medicines, and training of members in fields such as
para-veterinary services for cooperatives’ veterinary clinics (Rahmato, 2002).
Farmer cooperatives in Ethiopia have found a clear niche in the production of
high-value export crops such as coffee (ACDI/VOCA, 2005). At present,
cooperative membership is estimated at approximately 4.5 million
(ACDI/VOCA, 2005).
Traditional, informal organizations at the community level include funeral
groups (Idir), work or labor sharing groups (Jigie), and savings and loan type
of groups (Iquob). These groups provide linkages to outside actors and a
mechanism for information sharing. In addition, individual innovative farmers
are an important component of the innovation system.
A motivating force behind the growth of community-based development
organizations is the efforts of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to
promote human capital development and social capital formation at the local
level. NGOs are an important feature of Ethiopia’s agricultural innovation
system: although their activities were generally limited to famine relief in
1970s and 1980s, many are now investing heavily in sustainable agriculture
and rural development. Their comparative advantage lies in their ability to
reach poor and marginalized people, and their operational flexibility and
dynamism. NGOs operate at all levels of in Ethiopia: national, regional, zonal,
woreda, and kebele. In many rural areas, their work is often planned and
implemented in consultation or collaboration with the regional agricultural
bureaus or agricultural development offices at the woreda level.
Source: Spielman et al. 2006

23
STATE OF EXTENSION INPUTS AND RESOURCES TODAY
From the data and the team findings, the GOE appears committed to developing
the largest agricultural extension system in SSA. Currently, it is estimated that
8,500 FTCs have been established at the kebele level, with roughly 2,500 of these
FTCs reported to be fully functional at the present time (MOARD 2009A). In
addition, it was reported that there are about 45,000 DAs currently on duty at the
kebele level, including about 12 to 22 percent women DAs dependent on region
(MOARD 2009A). It was reported that the number of frontline extension
personnel is expected to increase to roughly 60,000 when all FTCs have been
established and are fully functional. About 63,000 DAs have graduated from the
ATVETs as of 2008, with 12 percent of them being female (MOARD ATVET
Department 2009). This overall total for DAs trained compared to DAs currently
serving (45,000) indicates that some ATVET graduates have left the extension
system since graduating from the ATVET system.

It should be noted that the vast majority of the currently employed DAs are
located in four regions, including Oromia (19,654), SNNPR (11,061), Amhara
(10,196) and Tigray (2,067)5 . As shown in Exhibit 5, the other regions have a
limited number of functional FTCs and DAs. The column “FTCs required” refers
to the number of FTCs that should be in that region, based on the number of
kebeles in the region. For instance, in Tigray, there should be 602 FTCs since
there are 602 kebeles, and the plan is to establish one FTC in every kebele.
Harari, a small, mostly urban region, has only 17 kebeles.

The column entitled “Established FTCs” is the number that, according to the
MOARD, has already been established country-wide. However, note that there is
a difference between “established” and “functional” FTCs. Established FTCs are
those that have a building and DAs in place. However, they are not functional
until they have started one component of training: either demonstration or
training. The training may be modular training or may be short-term, based on
demand.

24
EXHIBIT 5. Estimated number of FTCs and DAs in Ethiopia

FTCs DAs
FTCs Established Functional Male Female Total
Region required FTCs FTCs DAs DAs DAs
Tigray 602 588 55 1,879 188 2,067
Oromia 6420 2,549 1,147 ? ? 19,654
Amhara 3150 1,725 318 7532 2,664 10,196
SNNPR 3681 1,610 857 9,707 1,266 11,061
Afar 558 3 ? ? ? 748
Somali ? 2 ? 1167 102 1269
Harari 17 5 ? 47 5 52
Dire Dawa 25 7 ? 73 15 88
Benishangul- ? ? ? ? ? 677
Gumuz
Totals 14,455 6,489* 2,384 1287 122 45,812
*MOARD estimates total established FTCs currently at ~8500- number has increased since table
published

Source: Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development 2009a

Given that there are approximately 21.8 million adults (aged 15-65) who are
active in agriculture, it is estimated that when the extension system reaches its
goal of 60,000 DAs placed in the field, there will be roughly 1 DA for every 476
farmers; it should be noted that this would be one of the strongest extension
agent:farmer ratios found in the world today (see Exhibit 6).

25
EXHIBIT 6. Comparative extension investment in select developing countries
DAs or equivalent per 10,000 farmers
21

16

6
4
3
2

Ethiopia China Indonesia Tanzania Nigeria India

Total number 60 800 30 7 5 60

of DAs
Thousands

Farmers 476 625 1,667 2,500 3,333 5,000

per DA

Extension resources also exist at the woreda level. There are more than 700
urban and rural woredas (districts) in Ethiopia. There are, on average, about 30
or so agricultural officers in nine divisions or units within each woreda
Agriculture Office, including (on average) about 10 or more SMSs who are
expected to provide technical support and training to the DA staff at the kebele
level. Most of these SMSs are assigned across the same technical areas as the DA
staff, including crops, livestock, and NRM. In the past, most of the staff assigned
to these SMS positions began their extension careers at least 5 to 10 years earlier.

ALTERNATIVE METHODS AND APPROACHES TO EXTENSION

The position that this report takes in looking at alternatives systems and methods
for delivering extension is that there is no “best practice” that can be taken from
one country or region and implanted elsewhere without regard to the local
conditions. Ethiopia is a very diverse country, and there is a need to go beyond
“one size fits all” solutions. Every extension system, including structure and
approach, has to be evaluated in terms of where it will be used and who will use
it. There are four conditions that should be examined to determine “best fit”
solutions: the policy environment, the capacity of (potential) extension service
providers, the type of farming systems and the market access of farm households,
and the nature of the local communities, including their ability to cooperate
(Birner et al. 2006).

26
There have been many evaluations of different extension models and approaches,
in Ethiopia, Africa, and worldwide (for a review of alternative extension
approaches and methods that have been used in different countries see sidebar,
Alternative extension approaches). In addition, alternative methods and
approaches have been tried in Ethiopia (for a detailed review see Abate 2007).
For example, some organizations are using farmer research groups (FRGs) and
farmer research extension groups (FREGs) to identify appropriate technologies
that are the most suitable for farmers in different woredas or agro-ecological
zones. The Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) is partnering with
agricultural research centers at the federal and regional level and has used FRGs
in Oromiya Region to improve technology generation, development, verification,
and transfer. An important goal is to increase farmer participation in research.
These JICA-funded FRG projects have also started experimenting with other
extension approaches such as farmer field schools, as well as other techniques,
such as use of mobile phones to obtain market information. In SNNPR, the NGO
FARM-Africa’s Institutionalization of Participatory Extension project also used
FRGs, as did the Agricultural Research Training Project by the World Bank.
Agri-Service Ethiopia (ASE) uses a community-based institution approach: “A
rural people-centered nonpartisan, not for profit, voluntary, free and
multipurpose self-help community development association/institution” (Abate
2007: 69).

27
ALTERNATIVE EXTENSION APPROACHES
Farmer field schools were introduced into sub-Saharan African in the mid-1990s. Concept of FFS came from
Asia, where they were developed to promote integrated pest management programs. In Africa, FFS are being
used for a variety of activities, including food security, animal husbandry, and soil and water conservation.
They are even moving beyond agriculture into health (HIV/AIDS) and other relevant rural topics.
A related concept to FFS is the farmer study circles. Study circles, which are much more informal than FFSs,
provide opportunities for group exploration and learning, and to gain knowledge on whatever topic members
decide. These farmer groups meet regularly, with no external “expert” (although resource persons may be
called in or facilitators may guide the groups). Study circles allow a forum for people to learn and solve their
own problems. The Swedish Cooperative Centre focuses on human rights, improved livelihoods, and
increased incomes, and has developed at least 68 different study circle guides in SSA for issues ranging from
crops to HIV/AIDS (www.sccportal.org).
Other communication methods that are expanding rapidly in many countries are information and
communications technologies (ICT). These ICTs are increasingly being used in many countries, such as
China, India, and Chile; on the other hand, many Sub-Saharan African countries have lagged somewhat
behind due to their lack of basic ICT infrastructure. However, this situation is now rapidly changing in Ethiopia
and many other SSA countries; therefore, there are increasing opportunities to harness these ICTs to expand
the impact of extension and to address other rural development issues. However, some good ICT examples
exist; for instance, Kenya and Uganda are using mobile phone services to provide “cheap” messages directly
to farmers about crop price information via text messaging. In Tanzania, there are “market spies” or farmers
who visit local markets and remain in direct contact with other farmers in the village using mobile phones.
The decentralized, farmer-led, market-driven extension model used in India may provide useful insights to
strengthen extension systems in Ethiopia and other SSA countries. The Agricultural Technology Management
Agency (ATMA) model successfully increased average farm income by about 6%/year (against only 1%
annual increase in non-ATMA districts), as well as creating rural employment due to the post-harvest handling
of high-value products (see: Singh, Swanson, & Singh, 2006). In addition, ATMA was designed to integrate
extension programs across line several line departments, to link research and extension, and use bottom-up
planning procedures that directly involved farmers in decision-making. Many judge it as a successful model of
extension reform (Anderson, 2007). In helping farmers diversify their farming systems into appropriate high-
value crops/products, four axioms were considered essential in developing a market-driven extension system.
These are (a) don’t encourage farmers to produce without a market; (b) consider available transport in
deciding which products can be successfully transported to markets (e.g., if there are not all weather road,
don’t produce perishable products); (c) Pay attention to agro-ecological conditions for crops; and (d) diversify
the production of high-value crops/products to avoid market saturation.
There are also innovative approaches to financing extension services. The creation of a Trust Fund (Ghana)
and Basket Funding (Tanzania) allows for the pooling of funds and distribution to end-users based on
demand. In both cases, stakeholder forums, consisting of farmer groups, are brought together in providing
required services from either public or private bodies. Under this system, farmers are empowered to identify
and use selected qualified service providers (Government of Kenya, 2005). Other successful methods include
levies on export commodities, community-driven development funds (Guinea and Kenya), and contracting by
the government (Mozambique) (Alex, Byerlee, Helene-Collion, & Rivera, 2004).
Furthermore, extension financing can come through decentralization, involvement of farmers’ associations
and NGOs, contracting-out of extension services, public-private partnerships, privatization, and embedding
advisory services in other types of contracts (Anderson, 2007). More information can also be found in the
Agriculture Investment Sourcebook’s Module 3 (World Bank, 2005).
Source: Davis, 2008

28
In considering alternative extension approaches, the team also considered lessons
from other countries that could inform the report. Exhibit 7 illustrates how
selected Asian countries (e.g., China, India, and Indonesia) have transformed
their respective agricultural extension systems to become more comprehensive
and innovative during periods of rapid economic growth. As illustrated in this
figure, extension systems need to expand beyond “technology transfer” for the
major food crops to achieve short-term national food security. As developing
countries achieve rapid economic growth (e.g., 8 percent GDP growth in
Ethiopia during 2008), consumption patterns begin to change toward more high-
value crops (e.g., fruits, vegetables, spices), livestock (e.g., meat, milk, eggs) and
other products (e.g., honey, silk). This transformation in both domestic and
global market demand provides many new economic opportunities, especially for
small-scale and women farmers, to increase farm income.

EXHIBIT 7. Key functions of an innovative extension system that seeks both to achieve
national food security and to improve rural livelihoods

Source: Swanson 2009

However, in pursuing these new high-value crop and livestock products, farmers
must get organized into producer groups so they can efficiently link to these
growing market chains. In the process and with additional farm household
income, rural women begin to improve family nutrition, hygiene and health care,
especially for their children. The other key area where Ethiopia is making good

29
progress is in training farmers how to use sustainable NRM practices. Since most
NRM practices require further investments (both labor and capital), increasing
farm income becomes a critical factor to enable farmers to make these needed
investments. As shown in Exhibit 7, a comprehensive extension system must
focus on all four of these closely integrated functions to both achieve national
food security and to improve rural livelihoods.

ROLE OF INNOVATION IN EXTENSION

Innovative farmers play a key role by demonstrating how to intensify and/or
diversify current farming systems. These farmers are often very successful; in
Ethiopia, some have become “farmer millionaires.” These innovative farmers can
play a strategic role grounded in their interest in pursuing new high-value crops,
livestock, or other enterprises to increase their farm income. They do this first by
assessing emerging markets for these new crops/products vis-a-vis their specific
agro-ecological conditions, land, and labor resources, as well as their access to
these markets. Second, on a small-scale trial basis, they attempt to successfully
produce and market these crops/products. Once successful, they begin to scale up
their own production. In some extension systems, these innovative farmers are
considered for appointment to local “farmer professor” roles (see box on p 47) –
where they share and disseminate their learnings and promote the scale up of the
successful innovations across farming communities.

Many small-scale farmers within these communities are aware that innovative
farmers are trying something new, but it is challenging for these farmers to
handle the potential risk unless markets exist to absorb the different crops and
products. As markets expand for these different crops/products, many of these
enterprises become scalable.6 Here, as shown in Exhibit 8, is where an innovative
extension system can first identify these innovative farmers and their respective
enterprises, and then begin the process of engaging other farmers in scaling up a
number of these enterprises among different groups of farmers, given land and
labor availability, gender, and farmer interest.

30
EXHIBIT 8. Moving toward an innovation-driven extension system to increase
farm income

Source: Swanson 2009

In most rural communities, small-scale and women farmers are generally

unaware of these emerging markets, but once they learn more, especially through
farmer-to-farmer assessment, they are soon ready to learn how to produce and
market these products on a small-scale basis to minimize household risk. Again,
innovative farmers and “farmer professors” can play a strategic role in this
process by helping extension organize these interested farmers into producer
groups, so they can begin working together to produce and market these
crops/products. These start-up producer groups usually begin by supplying local
markets, but as they gain experience and expand their production, they begin
serving larger urban markets (i.e., developing value chains) and, in some cases,
global markets.

While the field-level extension staff can facilitate this process, they need strong
back-up support from research and the private sector since, in most cases, even
innovative farmers do not have the most up-to-date information and technology
for these crops/products. The key linkage mechanism in helping the DAs gain

31
access to this information/technology are the SMSs at the woreda level. First,
however, they need to become aware of these emerging markets and then to learn
more about how to produce and market these crops/products. In addition, as they
become aware of these emerging enterprises, these SMSs can facilitate the
training of the DA staff (by research and/or the private sector) and then help
these local producer groups link together into woreda-level producer associations
that can eventually supply larger urban markets. Finance also plays a critical role
at this stage of development. As more farmers become interested in the new
opportunities, finance can act as a catalyst to growth by providing new farmers
with the capital required to participate in new market opportunities.

32
4. Strengthening and transforming the
Ethiopian extension system
In this section, the strengths and constraints of the current Ethiopian agricultural
extension system are assessed, and specific recommendations to improve the
extension system are described. We start with the “front line” of extension at the
kebele level, analyzing resources and infrastructure at the FTC, knowledge and
capabilities of the extension agents, and the management and systems that apply
at this level. We then assess the supporting extension structures at the woreda
level, and finally conclude with a review of the policy environment at the
regional and federal levels.

KEBELE LEVEL

Infrastructure and resources

Strengths

Over the past years, the GOE has invested substantially in the infrastructure and
resources required to create a strong agricultural field extension presence, and it
is committed to further expanding this to become one of the most intensive
systems in the world. The plan is to ultimately establish a Farmer Training
Center in each kebele. The FTC should include an office/classroom building,
housing for the DA staff, livestock buildings, wells, fencing, demonstration
farms (DFs), and other needed facilities. The kebele will typically allocate 1.0 to
2.5 ha of community land to the FTC, land that can be used to demonstrate and
train farmers about new technologies, farming systems, new crops, livestock, or
other enterprises.

The physical development of about 8,500 FTCs has been under way since 2004;
about 2,500 FTCs have been strengthened with financial support from the World
Bank RCBP. FTCs are at different levels of development, based on local kebele
government and community commitment as well as the availability of
government/donor resources to cover capital expenditures (e.g., building
materials, equipment, animals) and operating cost (e.g., seeds, fertilizers). In
most kebeles, the local farmers provide the necessary labor for constructing the
buildings, since they have an interest in developing effective FTCs. The GOE has
also invested substantially into training and hiring DAs, which is discussed in the

33
knowledge and capabilities section below. Overall, this is a strong asset base that
Ethiopia can build on. This opens the opportunity to establish a truly world class
extension service over the next five years.

Constraints

However, the research team observed serious constraints in the actual

infrastructure and resource levels in most FTCs, even those supported by donor
programs. As detailed below, the lack of seed financing and operating funds to
invest in basic training infrastructure and to turn the DFs into teaching-learning
plots that are at least partially economically sustainable drastically reduces the
effectiveness of the FTCs.

The FTC infrastructure and resource levels differ substantially across the
country. Most of the better-developed FTCs were donor-financed; however, even
between regions and woredas there was considerable difference between, for
example, RCBP-supported FTCs. Many FTCs visited by the team had a standard
classroom and office space for the DA staff. However, there was considerable
variability in the quality of these buildings, depending both on donor financing
and local commitment in building a permanent classroom/office building. Some
FTC buildings were poorly constructed and will require continuing maintenance
to keep them functional; others were built as permanent structures that are
already being used as community centers, and agricultural extension needs to
compete with other community activities for space. Most FTCs do not have
access to electricity, therefore, only a few have TVs with DVD players and
almost none have any other type of advanced teaching equipment (e.g., overhead
projectors, screens, computers). In fact, some do not have any teaching material
at all. FTCs also have few independent learning materials (e.g., training
materials/manuals) that farmers can use for independent learning and support.

Most FTC DFs visited by the team have not been developed or used. While most
kebeles have allocated 1.0 to 2.5 ha to each FTC, most FTCs have neither the
resources nor the expertise needed to transform this land into an effective
teaching-learning tool. In some FTCs visited by the team, the DAs had used only
a small portion or none of the farm to demonstrate specific crops or production
techniques, and in some cases the demonstration was a failure (e.g., water
management). In discussions with local farmers, they noted that FTCs (even
those run by RCBP that are more developed) are often poorly managed. While
the most advanced may have become effective technical “demonstration” farms,
they were usually not viewed by the DA staff as potential “revenue centers” that

34
could demonstrate the economic attractiveness of the activities to farmers, and
could contribute to the operating funds of these FTCs. In summary, with one
exception, none of the DFs that the research team visited are currently being run
as effective teaching tools, including revenue generation, to demonstrate to
different types of farmers how they can increase their farm household income.

The lack of adequate operating funds for nearly all FTCs visited is a major and
continuing constraint that substantially reduces the extension and training
programs at each FTC. The availability of operating resources is the most
vulnerable line item in extension budgets, and may be reduced first when budgets
need to be cut. However, if these DFs can serve as both effective
teaching/demonstration centers and, at the same time, generate sufficient funding
to create FTCs that are more sustainable, then these centers can serve the long-
term needs of farmers within each kebele without being a burden on the woreda’s
budget (excluding DA salaries). Of course, this revenue generation goal should
not disproportionately shift resources away from the primary extension activities
that are most critical to increasing farm household income, nor take the DAs’
focus off their primary goal of serving the needs of different farm households,
including farm women and rural youth. This risk must be mitigated by careful
oversight of the FTC and DA activity by both woreda-level extension staff and
by the FTC management committee. Examples in Ethiopia show that revenue
generation and training are not in conflict with each other, but rather represent a
win-win in terms of financing and demonstration (see sidebar, Innovative FTC in
Atsibi, Tigray).

35
 INNOVATIVE FTC IN ATSIBI, TIGRAY
Sustainable “Model FTCs” are already demonstrating the impact that farmer-driven, market-
oriented approaches can have in extension. At an FTC the team visited in Tigray, the senior DA
is showing farmers how to run the demonstration farm like a business, buying and selling
different products to farmers (e.g., improved breeds of sheep, beehives, chicks) and local
markets (fruit, vegetables and milk), and then using these revenues to finance on-going
extension and training activities. In addition, the success of this FTC has resulted in the further
development of their training facilities, with local farmers donating their time, rocks and other
building materials to actually construct these facilities. This FTC is being used by both the Tigray
Region and Atsibi woreda Extension directors to both demonstrate and train DAs from other
kebeles and woredas within the region about how they should develop and use their FTC
demonstration farms for both “hands-on” training of local farmers and rural youth, as well as a
revenue generating unit to finance all future FTC operating costs.
The FTC is introducing many technical and market-driven innovations to farmers, such as “zero-
grazing,” which accelerates the fattening of both cattle and sheep, and then allows for the
efficient collection and use of manure for both organic fertilizer and cooking fuel. For example, in
2007 the FTC took an 8,000 Birr loan to purchase a cow that then generated about 10,000 Birr
in milk sales during the past year. In addition, they have 15 sheep (improved breed, including 14
ewes and 1 stud) and now they are selling lambs on credit to local farmers.
On the demonstration farm, DAs are training farmers on commercial fruit and vegetable
production, including drip irrigation, which was purchased for 950 Birr, on credit. For example, in
2008 the FTC produced 3 crops of tomatoes that generated about 10,000 Birr in revenue. In
addition, these DAs are training landless youth and women on other enterprises, such as
beekeeping and poultry production. For example, the FTC had procured 100 modern beehives
that were being distributed to rural households on a micro-credit basis. In addition, they have 20
hens to produce eggs for local markets. During 2008, the total operating costs of the
demonstration farm was about 16,000 Birr (all on micro-credit from the local cooperative),
resulting in net revenues of 7-8,000 Birr. The senior DA expects a significant increase in
earnings during 2009.

Only a few FTCs that have received sufficient government or donor support to
provide DAs with a suitable place to live at or near the FTC (see photo). Farmers
interviewed noted that in some cases it is difficult to
see the DAs because they are so far away and do not
have transport. Most often, DAs must find a local
family within the kebele who will rent them a small
room at a small cost or, more frequently, they must
find and rent a suitable room in the woreda or another
nearby town. If this latter option is pursued, then it was reported that most DAs
do not make daily trips to their assigned FTC, since most DAs also do not have
any type of transportation (i.e., a bicycle) and it may take them two or more
hours to walk to the FTC and then to return home each evening. The housing
issue becomes an increasingly important constraint when the DAs get married

36
and start having children. In the photo shown above, the DAs have bicycles so
they can more easily visit farmers in their local villages within their kebele
(RCBP-financed). In most other FTCs, which have not received sufficient
government or donor support, the DAs do not have bicycles or some other
suitable form of transportation.

An additional issue routinely raised by the DA staff is that they thought they
should have appropriate fieldware to wear especially when conducting extension
activities, such as farmer field days or when making field visits to local
communities. DAs also reported that there are no means or budgets for
communication, which limits their ability to, for example, get market information
or access remote resources for technical questions. In brief, shortfalls in housing,
transportation, equipment, and communication represent serious constraints that
limit the time DAs spend in local communities working with farmers and, in the
future, with producer groups that will need their continuing support.

Recommendations

4.1.1) Basic training infrastructure.

It is recommended that higher-quality classroom buildings be constructed and
equipped for basic operational effectiveness. They have the advantage of not
only serving as a functional farmer learning center, but could also serve as a
community learning center (e.g., health extension) for each kebele. Some of the
essential equipment and infrastructure needed at each FTC include desks and
chairs for the DA staff, as well as one or more tables and about 50 chairs for the
classroom. Since most teaching equipment (overhead projectors, TV with a DVD
player) depends on the availability of electricity, it is unlikely that much teaching
equipment requiring electricity will be usable in most FTCs over the short-term.
Therefore, a high-quality chalkboard and written training materials should be
provided to all FTCs. Eventually, kebeles need to be linked to the woreda and the
rest of the country via woreda- and kebele-net. Farmers mentioned that each FTC
should have electricity, TVs and videos, so they can more effectively teach
courses on different high-value crops/products.

4.1.2) Revenue-generating DFs.

As the system evolves, DFs should be operated and managed as economically
efficient enterprises that demonstrate the primary farming systems and their
economic viability demanded within the kebele. In order to achieve this goal,
both the management of the FTC as well as resourcing demands of the DF must
be addressed. While different management structures can be tested, we

37
recommend that the senior or head DA within the FTC be responsible for
managing the demonstration farm. This head DA will be responsible for the
planning and revenue generating activities of the FTC, and then to work with the
FTC management committee to determine what activities to pursue and how any
revenues generated by the DF should be spent. There are legal precedents for
how this can be managed with respect to the national budgeting frameworks, for
example, in the schools system.

Some initial resources should be considered to strengthen/equip the DFs, in line

with local demand. Examples include:

▪ Suitable livestock buildings and farming equipment for

the type of crop and livestock systems typically grown
by progressive farmers in each woreda, such as a
poultry shed for about 20-30 layers and 50 or more
broilers; a suitable livestock building for 1-3 dairy
animals, plus 12-15 improved breeds of sheep grown
under zero-grazing methods; and, possibly, an open
building or shed for modern beehives. In addition, each
FTC should have one or more storage buildings and/or
sheds for storing forage, grain, and other foodstuffs that
are produced on the DF, prior to these products either
being consumed by farm animals or sold in local
markets.
▪ A suitable deep well or water catchment pond that can
provide irrigation water during the dry season. The
purpose will be to demonstrate efficient water-use
management practices in producing different high-value crops (and
livestock products), especially during the dry season. Also, suitable
pumping equipment will be needed, such as a rope or pedal pump, in areas
with relatively shallow wells (e.g., under 20 or under 8 meters).

38
FARMER FEEDBACK AND DEMAND FOR TRAINING
Farmer input was a critical part of developing the report findings and recommendations. In every
region the research team talked to male and female farmers and farmer groups (and agro-
pastoralists where relevant). This farmer feedback is incorporated throughout the report. This
box gives some more specific feedback from extension clientele.
Farmer’s experience with DAs varied by region and woreda, with some farmers giving DAs high
marks for their extension services while others complained that DAs were inexperienced and/or
not able to offer the services they needed.
Some farmers said that the FTCs have brought about positive change. One agro-pastoralist said
that his land used to be idle before he was taught by the DAs to grow food and forage using
irrigation from the nearby Awash River. He was benefitting in terms of family nutrition and cash
through selling produce.
On the whole, farmers were happy with the services being provided to them. However,
sometimes the FTCs did not have the requisite training materials to adequately teach or
demonstrate to farmers. As seen above, farmers were ready to innovate and were demanding
innovations. In many cases, farmers could not innovate, however, due to lack of seed and
credit. These two items were in major demand by farmers. In addition, training needs mentioned
by farmers interviewed included:
• Introduction of new fruit tree varieties
• How to increase market access for fruits and vegetables
• How to organize cooperatives, both for marketing high-value crops and accessing
inputs
• Farm mechanization to improve crop management
• Water and irrigation management
• Agro-processing of vegetable crops to avoid low prices during the excess production
season.
• Beekeeping and dairy management
• Soil and water conservation, including preparing compost
• Organizing farmers to improve access to inputs and markets
• How to use new farm tools to increase labor-use efficiency.

4.1.3) Needed loans and other investments for start-up funding.

Each FTC will need initial start-up funding to successfully launch the DF and to
make the FTC more financially viable over the long term. This will include not
only the purchase of livestock, but should also include sufficient operating funds
to cover seed, fertilizer, labor, and other operating costs during the first two years
of operation. The reason for including operating costs through the second year is
that mistakes will likely be made by relatively inexperienced DAs during the first
year of operations; therefore, there should be sufficient resources to ensure that
these DFs are fully functional and generating sufficient revenues during the
second year to enhance financial sustainability by the beginning of year 3. An
illustrative list follows that gives potential investments and purchases for the
FTC; this list will vary by FTC dependent on the needs of the farmers.

39
▪ Purchase of suitable farming equipment, such as a bullock plow, wagon, and
other cultivation and pest management equipment, as well as livestock
handling/treatment equipment.
▪ Purchase of 1-3 dairy cows, plus 12-15 sheep
(improved breed) to initiate the zero-grazing livestock
operation
▪ Purchase of 20-50 layers and at least 50-100 chicks to
initiate the broiler operation
▪ Purchase of 2 bullocks both for plowing and for use in
moving grain and forage products from the DF to
storage and/or to the market.
▪ Purchase of 3 or more modern beehives, with colonies
▪ Purchase of improved/hybrid seed for staple food crops, plus vegetable seed
and fruit seedlings that will be needed to develop a diversified farming
system. In addition, funding for fertilizer and other production inputs (e.g.,
pesticides) will be needed during the first two years of operation.
Hiring of at least 3 full time (landless) farm laborers for the first two years of
operation, including one woman specifically assigned to handle the poultry and
the vegetable/fruit demonstrations.
Note that after the second year, labor and operational costs (e.g., seed, fertilizer)
will be subsidized from the revenues being generated by these DFs, which should
be demonstrating all of the recommended practices. There will necessarily be a
role for government funding while the FTCs evolve towards this capability. We
recommend that consideration be given to initial seed funding being given as a
loan (with favorable conditions), not a grant. This is important both to contain
system cost and to show farmers that it is worth taking up a loan to invest in
these activities. As the team witnessed in the case of the Atsibi FTC, the ultimate
revenue-generating potential of these assets will be capable of paying these
loans. Making investment decisions, and taking up and paying back loans, is an
essential part of demonstration.

4.1.4) Housing, fieldware, transport and communication.

All FTCs should have adequate housing available for their DA staff, and all DAs
should be required to live in their FTC housing and to keep regular hours at the

40
FTC or in carrying out their field assignments within the kebele. The housing
should include simple furniture (e.g., a bed, table, chairs) for each unit. Some
means of transportation should be provided for DAs so they can effectively visit
the farm and pastoral households being served. In most cases, the transportation
problem can be resolved with strong bicycles that can handle rough roads and
paths, but regions and woredas will need to determine the appropriate means of
transport (considering, among others, horses, mules, camels, and motorbikes, on
a cost-benefit basis). Incentives should be put in place to invest in the
maintenance of transport and other hardware. Also, where possible, woredas
should consider providing adequate fieldware to DAs. When DAs gain access to
these facilities and equipment, they should sign an agreement that this furniture
and transportation equipment belongs to the FTC and cannot be removed if they
transfer or resign their position. Most DAs have mobile phones, which can be
used to communicate for professional purposes if a modest budget is provided,
and safeguards against private use are put in place.

41
TRANSFORMING FTCS FROM “START-UP” TO “FULLY OPERATIONAL”
EXTENSION HUBS
Based on observations in the field, different FTCs are at different levels of development, based on
government and donor investments, as well as the contributions of kebele governments and local
farmers in helping develop effective FTCs. Figure 7 that follows illustrates these different levels of
developing both the FTC physical and human infrastructure. Ideally, all FTCs should move as quickly as
possible from level 1, which is the starting point, to level 5, which will typically take 3 or more years to
achieve, depending on contributions from government, donors and the farm households being served,
as well as the technical and managerial competence of the DAs hired for these different positions.

Example FTC level definition Government should determine elements of "ideal FTC"
Level 1 ▪ Building/classroom exists DAs believe in
"Minimal" ▪ 3 DAs hired and present and share overall
▪ Basic classes held messaging
Level 2 ▪ Head DA assigned High farmer feedback and
"Baseline" ▪ Demonstration farms exist participation levels; understanding
and are utilized of overall message and goals of
▪ Farmer feedback extension
mechanism in place
Farmers participate in
Level 3 ▪ High performing DAs/high profit-making activities as
"Emerging" level of farmer feedback part of courses (e.g., fruit,
▪ Transport access animal fattening)
▪ Farmer groups established
Government financing for salary;
Level 4 ▪ Farmer participation in other activities/resources partially
"Teaching" entrepreneurial activities self-funded from entrepreneurial
▪ ICT access + power (e.g., activities
1 cell phone, 1 DVD/TV)
▪ Head DA elevated to Innovative activities include
rotational teaching level; farmer's markets where model
farmers show off products and
additional DA provided
discuss techniques
Level 5 ▪ Profitable activities in place
Example taken from
"Entrepre- which finance some
high performing FTC in
neurial resources (e.g., livestock
Atsibi Woreda
Model" fattening/selling)

KNOWLEDGE AND CAPABILITIES (HUMAN RESOURCES)

Strengths

The number of DAs has expanded rapidly over the past five to six years, and has
now reached over 45,000 DAs employed in government services. However, at
least as important as the number of DAs are their capabilities and their
knowledge, which jointly determine their approach to extension. The vast
majority of the DA extension workers have the basic technical expertise. When
the official training schedule is followed, a DA receives 70 percent of his/her
three-year basic education through practical training.

42
Farmers interviewed were demanding specific skills from DAs; they noted the
need for training and technical assistance to all farmer cooperatives as they
rapidly move into the production of high-value crop and livestock enterprises.
Some farmers noted that DAs lacked the necessary practical experience and
expertise to teach these skills. One example of a step in the right direction with
this regard is the RCBP project has developed training modules for about 12
different high-value crops and livestock enterprises.

Moreover, we observed selected DAs who were exceptionally entrepreneurial,

motivated, and capable technically, but also proficient in the “soft skills”
required to work with farmers in a participatory way. The impact that DAs with
such knowledge and capabilities can have is illustrated in the sidebar describing
the Atsibi FTC. Based on the initiative of three young DAs, an empty building on
a plot of land has been developed into an impressive training center which offers
a broad range of integrated crop, livestock, and NRM demonstrations.
Furthermore, the FTC generates sufficient income to cover all operating
expenses and further capital expenditures to continue to expand activities.
Examples like this can serve as a model and source of inspiration for scaling up
effective practices in Ethiopia.

The DA career offers certain benefits. Salary increases and scholarships are
available to high performing DAs, and some regions and woredas employ local
reward systems. In addition, there is an annual nation-wide farmer award
program for farmers, DAs, and sometimes researchers. In this program, the most
innovative farmers and best-performing DAs are recognized at the national level
for their performance. There are also top-performing farmers and DAs selected at
all the other levels; the top ones from each level go to the next level until the
reach the nationwide award program.

The extension staff evaluation system has also been strengthened, with more
community input, in recent years. For DAs, they are typically evaluated at the
woreda level. The new evaluation (launched in 2008) gives 60 percent of
evaluation say to the community and 40 percent to supervisors. Staff are
evaluated on the execution of planned activities, the approach, and by the
subjective evaluation of the community and kebele council. The woreda
evaluates performance and impact. There is also the opportunity (albeit limited)
to upgrade the education level. The top five percent of DAs (selected for the best
performance) are allowed to upgrade to the B.Sc. level.

43
Another important observation during the field visit is that farmers in all regions
visited are ready and interested in finding ways to increase their agricultural
productivity, as well as to intensify and diversify their farming systems.
Innovative and progressive farmers are already using more intensive production
packages and, simultaneously, they are also changing their farming systems,
including double-cropping and beginning to produce different high-value
crop/livestock products. Most farmers that the team met with during the visit are
ready for change and see the extension system as the primary source of
information, training, and advisory services that can help them increase their
farm household income (see also EDRI, 2004).

Constraints

There are serious constraints in the capabilities and knowledge of most DAs:
technical skills are rather narrow, and business skills and entrepreneurial
mindsets are rare. Furthermore, a “technology push” mindset dominates, while
knowledge of participatory methods and how to be responsive to farmers is rare.
This is a function of both attitude and lack of facilitation skills. Limited career
opportunities, frequent transitions, and the low recognition of the DA’s
importance, in combination with low resource levels, reduce the motivation of
DAs.

As pointed out in Section 3, agricultural extension systems must broaden their

focus beyond just transferring technologies for the staple food crops. The
extension system has been successful in developing a set of packages for
production or cereal crops, including maize and wheat production. In some
regions, additional packages have been developed and implemented at the FTC
level to meet specific farmer and location demands: coffee packages, for
example, have been produced and implemented in SNNP. This flexible approach
to package development has not been implemented across all regions, however,
representing a constraint in package design that should be addressed. Package
development needs to incorporate farmer needs and be regional-specific,
addressing the broad range of farmer needs.

44
 INCREASING EXTENSION’S FOCUS ON WOMEN
An important factor to be considered in broadening extension’s priorities is the (potentially)
important role of women in increasing farm household income. In most cultures, including
Ethiopia, rural women are primarily responsible for agricultural activities carried out close to their
homes, such as backyard gardening, poultry production, and beekeeping. To increase farm
household income, the emerging market-demand for many high-value crop and livestock
products fall within the traditional roles and responsibilities of rural women.
It should be noted that when small-scale and women farmers begin diversifying into high-value
crop and livestock enterprises, then the marketing of those products soon becomes an
important constraint. The most effective way of both solving these marketing problems and
enabling small-scale farm households to capture most of these revenues is by organizing these
interested farmers into specific types of commodity-based producer groups, that are suitable for
these different enterprises. Therefore, some of these emerging producer groups in Tigray are
actually composed and led by women farmers who are starting to produce fruits, vegetables,
eggs, broilers and other high-value products. In short, engaging women farmers in the
production and marketing of high-value crop and livestock products is an excellent strategy to
increase farm and pastoral household income.

In contrast to the use of diverse packages in select regions, many regions and the
field level extension workers are often disseminating “standard” production
practices for the major food crops across the entire region. As a result, little
attention is being given by these extension field workers to a more balanced and
expanded extension program that gives increased attention to the intensification
and diversification of farming systems. Farmers specifically report that package
availability for FTC-level cropping systems is often very limited, and in most
regions visited only a few main packages (e.g., maize) were available for use.

At the same time, innovative and progressive farmers – even in regions with a
more traditional extension strategy (i.e., technology transfer) – are already using
more intensive production packages and, simultaneously, they are also changing
their farming systems, including double-cropping and beginning to produce
different high-value crop/livestock products. The problem is that extension field
workers have very limited skills concerning these emerging crops and livestock
enterprises, nor are they being encouraged and supported in helping less-
advanced farmers learn about these new crop and livestock enterprises.
Assuming that Ethiopia’s strong economic growth will continue after the current
economic crisis, then it is expected that changing consumption patterns among
urban consumers will offer important and expanding economic opportunities for
small-scale and women farmers and pastoralists across most of Ethiopia. The
majority of DAs currently have neither the capabilities nor the knowledge to
support this development.

45
This brings up the issue of extension systems for different clientele groups.
Should there be different systems for women farmers, or for pastoralists? The
authors take the view that when an extension system is bottom-up and truly
participatory, this means that the system itself is flexible enough to reach
different clientele groups. Therefore there is no need for a completely separate
extension system to reach pastoralists or women, but rather one that is able to
understand the needs of special groups and to adapt to meet these needs. This
also highlights the need for DAs to have many generalist skills (see discussion
below), since they may not know what specific areas will be demanded by
farmers and pastoralists.

Frontline extension workers must be prepared to work with and assist all types of
farm/pastoral households, including rural young people, as these families seek
out new enterprises and off-farm activities that can both increase household
income and improve livelihoods (including better nutrition, health, and hygiene
practices). The field extension workers must be able to respond effectively to the
emerging skill, knowledge, technology, and information demands of rural
farm/pastoral households, especially as they work to intensify, diversify, and/or
increase the productivity of their current and emerging farming systems, based
on changing market demand, while using sustainable NRM practices.

PASTORAL EXTENSION
Pastoral and agro-pastoral areas make up almost 65 percent of the total land of Ethiopia
(EEA/EEPRI 2006) and include at least six million people. Due to the culture and lifestyle
of these traditionally nomadic people, they are difficult to reach using traditional extension
methods and topics. They are also in high-risk areas where communities are often
supported with food aid programs, administered by NGOs under government coordination.
These NGOs also focus on water resource development and education, as well as human
and animal health (EEA/EEPRI 2006).
For many years there was no pastoral/agro-pastoral extension package; however,
extension packages are now being developed and transferred to pastoral households,
including water and feed resources, as well as animal health (EEA/EEPRI 2006). To date,
mostly animal fattening programs have been taught to pastoralists by livestock extension
DAs.

Among pure pastoralists, the government is promoting rangeland management and

improved forage. While there is a plan to have one animal health clinics per kebele, so far
there is only one per three kebeles.

The principle of specialization poses another constraint. The tension between

general and specific skills is a common one in extension systems. Under the
previous extension system (Participatory Demonstration & Extension Training

46
System or PADETS; see EDRI, 2004), frontline DAs were assigned and
functioned as general agricultural extension agents, as is common in most
countries. For the past six years, DAs have been trained and assigned as
specialists (crops, livestock, and NRM). Even on the FTC DF, some DAs have
decided to divide the land into three areas – crops, livestock, and NRM – rather
than using an integrated farming systems approach. These examples illustrate a
constraint in that the DAs are attempting to carry out extension programs from
their own particular technical perspective, while farmers themselves are seeking
to diversify and intensify their farming system within specific agro-ecological
areas, which directly involves all three technical areas, plus farm management
and marketing issues.

Once on the job, these DAs must function as generalists, due both to farmer
needs and current transportation constraints. For example, when a farmer
approaches a DA, he/she has no idea that they are a “specialist” in a particular
technical area; therefore, they ask for advice on a broad range of questions and
are disappointed if the DA cannot help them solve their particular problem or
constraints. In addition, as the farming systems across Ethiopia continue to
intensify and diversify, the extension staff will continue to need broader
technical, farm management, marketing, and other professional skills so they can
help farmers get organized into producer groups and then help them get linked to
specific markets for the expanding range of high-value crops/products.

Due to their age, lack of on-farm experience, and this narrower subject-matter
focus, most DAs lack the practical and “hands-on” skills and knowledge needed
to gain the confidence of farmers (see also ATVET chapter for a discussion of
the lack of practical training). In addition, these DAs also lack training in other
key areas, such as how to intensifying/diversifying farming systems, agricultural
marketing, as well as other communications and “soft” skills, such as how to
organize producer groups.

It was also reported that DA performance incentives are limited in some regions
and many DAs seek alternative career opportunities due to low job satisfaction.
As the DA program has developed, progress has been made to develop incentive
programs for DAs, including university scholarships and regional and national
DA rewards. These efforts represent a good initial step towards creation of a DA
incentive system. However, the lack of a clear professional career path that
includes incentives, salary increases, awards, and/or other professional
opportunities (e.g., scholarships) for the extension field staff remains a major
constraint. Some regions and woredas have implemented successful incentive

47
programs including offering university scholarships and small increases in pay
based on performance, but most have not implemented sufficient incentive
structures.

Interviewed DAs cite both lack of incentives and a lack of clarity in reward
system design as drivers of low job satisfaction Opportunities for increasing
education, named by DAs as one of the most appealing incentives, are often very
limited, with most DAs feeling they have very little chance of ever being selected
for one of these scholarships. Additional opportunities to enhance their expertise,
improve their extension services to farmers, and have the opportunity to move up
professionally within the extension system are non-existent in some regions and
woredas.

Additionally, while official staffing policy indicates that DAs ought to be staffed
in home woredas, DAs are sometimes transferred to regions where they have no
connection. In some cases, DAs have been transferred to a different FTC after
only six to nine months. This is detrimental to DA impact, as experience shows it
takes at least two to three years before a DA has earned the respect, relationships,
and location-specific expertise to add real value to farmer communities.

Finally, DA capacity to reach adequate numbers of farmers remains a constraint.

It should be noted that farmer-to-farmer training offers an additional way for
DA’s efforts to be leveraged and made more effective across the kebele.
“Farmer professors” are discussed in detail in the box below.

FARMER PROFESSORS – FARMERS LEAD INNOVATION SCALE-UP

To diversify into new high-value crop and livestock enterprises, farmers need to learn new farm
management skills that are best taught through experiential learning (See: Kahan, 2007). In
India, front-line extension staff used “exposure visits” as a primary experiential learning method
of introducing local farm leaders (both men and women farmers) to new high-value crops or
products being produced by innovative farmers in other kebeles, woredas and even regions
(See Exhibit 10 in Chapter 3). The opportunity to learn about a new high-value crop or
enterprise from innovative farmers, who are already successfully producing and marketing these
different crops/products, would strongly resonate with most interested farmers. Once these local
farm leaders think this new crop or enterprise has a good chance of success in their own kebele,
then they will be ready to learn the necessary technical and management skills from trained
extension workers (SMSs).

In India, local extension agents called these innovative farmers, “farmer professors,” to seek
their interest, support and expertise in 1) creating local producer groups for specific high-value
crops/products, 2) providing the necessary start-up technical and management support for the
other farmers, and 3) arranging for the packaging and/or marketing these high-value
crops/products. Once these different groups of small-scale men and women farmers got
engaged in their first new enterprise, then they immediately began exploring other options that
would further increase farm household income (See: Singh, et al, 2006; Swanson 2008b).

48
Recommendations

4.1.4) Enhanced training with a focus on existing DAs.

DAs need better training in a number of dimensions: broader technology skills
applicable to their local area, “soft skills” that enable them to work with different
types of farmers and pastoralists in a participatory way and to catalyze the
development of farmer groups, and business/entrepreneurial skills that help the
run the FTCs as revenue centers and to demonstrate economic thinking to the
customers. The needs for such skills were expressed by the farmers during the
study, as well as others. This should be reflected in an adjusted schedule for
ATVET students. More importantly, a major effort should be made to deliver
these skills to the existing DAs via in-service training offering. Details are
provided below.

DAs need to be knowledgeable about all of the major farming systems pursued
by different categories of pastoralists and farmers within their kebele, as well as
how these farming systems are changing as farmers move into new high-value
crop and livestock systems. This type of training should be organized through
appropriate in-service training courses. These types of training could be
organized for DAs at the ATVET level or at the woreda level, led by SMSs. The
choice of training should be driven by farmer needs, and should be jointly
decided upon with the supervisors of the DAs.

DAs also need better training in business administration and economics. They
need to make investment decisions on the DFs, take loans, run small operations,
and – more importantly – teach farmers how to run their own enterprises
economically.

Another important area that needs attention is to offer

training on the organizational and leadership skills
needed to organize producer groups, especially among
small-scale and women farmers. These producer
groups will become important as farming systems
change, so different producer groups will be needed to
set up marketing chains for different types of high-value crops and livestock
products. And the management capacity of these different producer groups will
differ somewhat, in part, in terms of quality control for their respective products
and the need for more direct supply chain management.

In addition, DAs (and SMSs) should be trained in specific ICT and extension
training skills. For example, it was reported that none of the ATVETS that the

49
team visited has any computers with Internet access that are available for training
and/or use by students in developing their ICT skills (see section 5). However,
once woredas have extension-linkage centers (WELC) with Internet access (see
below), then both SMSs and DAs will have easier access to technical
information, training materials, and marketing information from both national
and international sources. Also, mobile telephony could supplement the use of
the Internet in enhancing information access. In addition, both DAs and SMSs
need to learn how to use more interactive teaching-learning skills more
effectively as they organize and provide extension training and demonstration
activities for different groups of farmers.

4.1.5) Generalists rather than specialists.

While there has been and will continue to be debate on the topic, the
recommendation from this report, based on the extensive literature review,
discussion with many stakeholders, field research, and extension field
experience, is that DAs should receive a more generalist training, acknowledging
that a specialist approach may be necessary in specific regions or agro-ecological
zones. DAs should be trained and then assigned to work as general DAs to serve
specific service areas (villages) within each kebele, with SMSs serving as the
specialists within the extension system in providing specialized training and
technical assistance to both the DAs and/or farmer groups based on specific
needs and problems. As a result of this recommendation, the ATVETs should
modify their curriculum to train more generalist DAs who more fully understand
the major farming systems within the region, including training in farm
management, marketing, and value-chain development that reflects the
continuing diversification of farming systems within the region. In addition, if
this policy is enacted, then the current DAs will need short-term in-service
training courses in those technical, farm management, and marketing areas that
are suitable for the farming systems in their particular woreda. Given the past
training towards specialists, a more generalist profile of the existing DAs can be
achieved by taking in-service training classes that fill the most important
knowledge gaps. This way, a FTC has three generalists, but each of them has a
deeper knowledge spike in a particular area, which is a “best of both worlds”
solution.

50
FRONTLINE EXTENSION AGENTS AS GENERALISTS
A widely debated issue across many different countries is whether front-line extension agents
(i.e. DAs) should be generalists or specialists. This was an important issue in India, where the
front-line extension staff only focused on stable food crops and farmers found it difficult to get
technical and management information on livestock, horticultural crops, agro-forestry, fisheries
and other high-value crops/products. At the time, India had parallel line departments (and
extension staff) for all of these different technical areas. In the late 1990s the Ministry of
Agriculture decided to field-test a “single window” delivery system whereby the front-line
extension staff (most with B.Sc. degrees) became generalists that would facilitate the teaching-
learning process across all technical areas (Swanson, 2009).

First, these front-line extension staff would help men and women farmers explore different high-
value crops/products by visiting innovative farmers. Second, they would help these interested
farmers get organized into different producer groups and then link these groups either to
innovative farmers and/or SMS or researchers in helping these farmers develop the necessary
technical and management skills needed to successfully produce and market these different
high-value crops/products. Under this model, the SMS remained present at the district level to
provide the necessary technical training and support; however, the front-line extension agents
functioned as “farming system” generalists that facilitated different groups of farmers in
diversifying into different high-value crops, livestock and other enterprises (e.g. sericulture,
fisheries, etc.)

4.1.6) Attractive career paths.

The MOARD should develop a more systematic career path and performance
award program for the kebele-level DA staff to incentivize, recognize, and
reward superior performance. We suggest some specific options the MOARD
should consider in developing a career path.

▪ After two or three years of superior performance at their first FTC, junior-
level DAs should have the opportunity to apply for either a senior DA
position or be allowed to apply for another FTC position that is closer to the
woreda headquarters (especially as DAs get married and have children).
Once appointed as the senior DA at any FTC, they should receive a small
salary increase of 50-100 birr/month.
▪ After two years of professional service, all DAs should be entitled to a small
annual salary increase to encourage them to continue serving the needs of
farmers in their kebele rather than looking for other non-extension jobs. For
example, if they were given a 5 percent annual increase each year from
years 3 through 5, and then a 4 percent annual salary increase from years 6
through 10; then after 10 years of service, the senior-level DAs would have
an average salary of about 1,300-1,400 birr/month and regular DAs would
have an average salary of 1,230 birr/month.

51
▪ To enhance the capacity and expertise of the DA staff, after three years of
professional service, they should be encouraged to apply for an expanded
number of university scholarships, with selection being based solely on
superior or outstanding performance. Ideally, at least 10 percent of the DA
staff with three or more years of experience should be selected each year for
one of these part-time scholarship programs (courses are scheduled during
the slow season of the year). These part-time degree programs take about
five to six years to complete. Under this arrangement, the majority of above-
average DAs would be able to complete their B.Sc. degrees within about 10
years of service. Any DA who resigns from their extension position while
working on their university degree would immediately lose their university
scholarship; therefore, this condition would be a strong incentive for them to
continue working hard in their field extension work while completing their
university degree program.
▪ After completing their university degree, all DAs should be able to
immediately apply for supervisory or SMS positions at the woreda level
based on their level of performance and area of expertise (based on their
degree program). Presently, inexperienced B.Sc. degree graduates can move
directly into these SMS positions without having any extension or practical
on-farm experience. DAs should be given the opportunity to move to
higher-level positions within the extension system.
▪ Every year, superior performance award certificates should be given to
different categories of field extension staff (both DAs and SMSs), based
solely on specific performance criteria. A person should only be eligible for
these once every five years, so that these awards can be conferred more
widely to DA staff across each woreda. Examples of the possible
performance certificates that might be given to different categories of
extension staff could include:
– Two superior performance certificates could be given each year to the
most outstanding “young” DAs, with two to five years of experience;
– One senior extension award certificate for the most outstanding senior
DA in the woreda based on actual performance, as well as a similar
award for the most competent SMS at the woreda level who is providing
active training and technical support to DAs and farmer groups
throughout the woreda.

52
 – One FTC “team award” certificate for the most outstanding FTC team
(e.g., based on specific criteria, such as number of producer groups
organized; net revenue earnings from the demonstration farm, and so
forth).
In addition, there could be other performance certificates based on years of
service, such as 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 years of service as certificates as DA or
senior DA extension staff members. It should be noted that none of these
certificates would involve financial awards, but would simply be an attractive
certificate, signed by the woreda director, that could be placed on the wall of the
recipient’s office at the FTC to recognize their superior performance in carrying
out extension activities within the woreda.

Management and systems

Strengths

A common feature of successful extension systems around the world is that they
are driven by, and accountable to, farmers. This is reflected in the management
structures of the field extension units. It should be noted that the basic elements
for a more farmer-driven extension management system are already (partially) in
place in Ethiopia. To begin with, the official extension strategy states
decentralized decision making and farmer participation as key attributes of the
Ethiopian extension system. In kebeles in some regions, these crucial principles
of good extension service are indeed successfully implemented. FTCs are steered
by a committee that includes elected model farmers/ pastoralists and
representatives from women and youth associations, next to the kebele head (who
acts as chairman) and representative from the cooperatives.

The BPR system is being widely used with the intention of assessing the
performance and impact of the field extension staff at the woreda and kebele
levels.

Constraints

In a decentralized, farmer-driven extension system, extension staff should be

accountable to the farmers they serve. However, in meeting with farmers on the
FTC management committee, we learned that this is the exception rather then the
norm. In some kebeles, farmers seemed to be unaware of what the DAs were
actually supposed to be doing. Further, most FTCs are not steered by

53
committees, and pastoralists/farmers have little influence on which technologies
are offered, and how funds are being invested.

There is little transparency on the performance of DAs and FTCs. In fact, it was
even difficult to gain reliable data on the number of DAs in service, let alone the
level of effectiveness of individual FTCs or the impact they have on pastoralist
and farmer communities. Moreover, the supervision, management, and
accountability of DAs at the FTC level are not altogether clear. DAs are to be
supervised by the woreda-level supervisory staff on a regular basis, but the lack
of transportation made it difficult for them to make these supervisory visits.
Within the FTCs, the management structure of DAs at each FTC appears largely
based on years of service, not on their respective management skills to operate a
successful FTC. For example, in some cases, if the head DA was a livestock
person, livestock seemed to be the highest priority for that FTC, not what farmers
wanted and/or needed.

Recommendations

4.1.6) FTC Management Committee.

Each FTC should have a management committee, representing all clientele
groups within the community, including men and women farmers/ pastoralists, as
well as rural young people and cooperatives (and, of course, the DAs). The
kebele head would act as chairman, and the head DA as the coordinator who
prepares the decision making and manages the follow-up. Directly engaging
these different rural groups and organizations in deciding on extension priorities
will ensure that the DAs within each FTC are delivering needed extension
programs and services, distributing any revenue generated by the demonstration
farms in a manner consistent with the FTC’s development, as well as their being
accountable to these groups. It also enhances the ownership of the FTC by the
kebele, which is important as the kebele needs to support the FTC (e.g., with
land, labor, materials) and as farmers need to be open to the services offered.

4.1.7) Performance measurement and management system.

We recommend the establishment of a pragmatic performance management
system at the kebele level. In the beginning, performance indicators are largely
input based, but over time increasingly shift towards output and outcomes.
Performance should be measured based on a combination of generally applicable
evaluation criteria and specific targets agreed upon between the DAs and their
supervisors. Next to measurable impact criteria it is important to collect feedback
from farmers and other stakeholders in the evaluation process. The feedback to

54
the DA should be both evaluative and developmental, and should include specific
suggestions for further development. In each FTC, there should be a head DA
who coordinates activities. This head DA should be nominated by the FTC
management committee based on quality, not tenure.

WOREDA LEVEL

Strengths

Based on field estimates, there are roughly 7,000 SMSs and 4,000 supervisors
employed in the public extension system in Ethiopia. SMSs at the woreda level
play a critical role in training and providing technical support to the DA staff and
pastoralists/farmers in each kebele. The experienced SMSs and DA supervisors
interviewed at the woreda level have not only the technical expertise, but also
considerable practical experience in providing technical and management support
to both farmers and DAs at the kebele level. At the same time, these SMSs are
the logical link between the DA staff and research scientists in addressing
specific technical problems, and to ATVETS teachers (and possibly those in
agricultural universities), especially in arranging in-service training or in
securing simple training materials. The third link is to markets and up-to-date
market information, especially for emerging high-value crop and livestock
products, since farmers will need these new types/sources of market information
in making sensible farm management decisions.

Constraints

As noted above, SMSs are expected to provide training and technical assistance
services to both DAs and farmers, based on specific needs at the kebele level.
However, at present, most SMSs have very limited resources, especially
transportation, training, and communication resources, to provide technical
support and training services to DAs and farmers at the kebele level. As result,
most SMSs largely sit in their offices at the woreda level, and are not even able
to support DAs via remote communication. Today, SMSs are primarily
accountable to the woreda agriculture director, rather than to FTCs and the
kebeles being served.

Many of these SMSs will need additional training as the farming systems in each
region continue to intensify and diversify. Most of the newly appointed SMSs
have B.Sc. degrees, but they have very little practical experience. Most SMSs
need additional training in specific high-value crop and/or livestock systems, as

55
well as training in farm management, business economics, marketing, and related
“soft” skills (e.g., teaching-learning and communication skills, as well as how to
organize producer groups) that will be needed by the DA staff. These additional
skills are necessary as the SMS works with the DA staff in helping men and
women farmers, pastoralists, and rural young people respond to new and
expanding market opportunities.

In addition, these SMSs have very limited or no linkages with research and
educational institutions, nor with other sources of essential technical and
marketing information, due to inadequate communications and information
capacity.

Woredas should also facilitate networking and best practice exchange among the
DAs. With few exceptions, this objective is not met by woredas today. There are
usually neither rooms available nor meetings organized for all the DAs and
SMSs within a woreda to meet.

Recommendations

4.2.1) SMS skill-building.

In-service training and educational opportunities should be made available for
both new and experienced SMSs. First, SMSs who are interested in pursuing a
B.Sc. degree in their technical area should be given the opportunity to compete
for university scholarships, based on their current performance. This opportunity
will serve as an incentive to provide better training and technical support to the
DA staff. In the process of pursuing a B.Sc. degree, they will increase their
technical competence and learn more up-to-date technical knowledge and skills.
As with DAs, the university program should be part-time, so that they can
continue to pursue their job obligations.

4.2.2) Woreda Extension Linkage

Centers.
Each woreda should establish and support a
woreda Extension Linkage Center
(WELC). This center would serve a number
of purposes: It would be an information and
knowledge center for DAs and SMSs. It
would have books and research papers, and
it would offer computer access (plus a printer) with Internet capability so they
could communicate directly with key researchers at the regional and/or national
level. This would also allow downloading of hard and soft copies of needed

56
technical and marketing information, as well as available teaching materials that
could be used to address the needs of the DA staff in each FTC. As part of this
WELC, there should be a classroom or meeting hall where SMSs could meet
with and/or train DAs and/or interested model farmers. We propose to establish a
monthly meeting day, during which SMSs can provide short training, and DAs
can share best practices and can put important topics up for discussion. Under the
IPMS project, some WELCs have been established (see photo). In order to limit
the additional budget required, existing resources (rooms, ICT) should be used as
much as possible.

4.2.3) Woreda advisory committee.

To improve program coordination and in setting overall extension priorities
across each woreda, a woreda advisory committee (WAC) should be established
in each woreda, with one representative from each kebele-level FTC
Management Committee (MC) in the woreda. This WAC should meet at least 4
times/year to review the progress of the extension field staff in serving the
different kebeles and the different farmer groups (men and women farmers,
pastoralists and rural youth); help coordinate extension activities across the
woreda; and set extension priorities for future activities across the woreda that
could be implemented and supported by the SMSs, in collaboration with the DAs
in each FTC. Note that this committee will not set the priorities on the FTC level,
which is the responsibility of the FTC management committee.

REGIONAL AND FEDERAL LEVEL

Strengths

As noted earlier, the GOE is committed to building a strong and sustainable

agricultural extension system. The MOARD has begun the process of
decentralization of the extension system, so it can be more effective in serving
the needs of farmers in the different regions, woredas, and kebeles across the
country. Each region now plays a greater role in setting extension priorities and
in providing technical support service to the extension staff at the woreda and
kebele level. As explained in more detail in the following constraints section,
there are important differences between regions in how priorities are being set;
however, this move towards further decentralization is a very positive first step.
The task ahead is to continue this decentralization process down to the woreda
and kebele levels in all regions, so that farmers will play a central role in setting
extension priorities in their own communities.

57
Since extension priorities are now being largely set at the regional level, the team
found important differences in terms of the actual extension strategy being
pursued in different regions. In some regions the extension strategy was already
shifting to become more market-oriented as farmers sought to increase farm
income by pursuing new high-value crops (e.g., horticulture) and livestock
products (e.g., backyard poultry and beekeeping).

The primary functions of the regional and zonal extension offices in a

decentralized extension system are to provide administrative and financial
support for the extension field offices and staff, including monitoring the
performance of SMSs and DAs, as well as assessing the overall accomplishments
and impacts of the extension offices at the woreda and kebele levels. Regional
extension offices are also responsible for coordinating and managing the
distribution of awards and scholarship for high-performing field extension
workers, as well as taking the necessary action for those extension staff who are
engaged in other activities (e.g., distance education) and not fulfilling their job
responsibilities.

The senior-level extension directors and experts at the regional level the team
interacted with appeared competent. In some regions, these leaders are taking an
important role in further decentralizing the extension system by encouraging the
further diversification of farming systems, based on agro-ecological conditions.
In particular, they are encouraging DAs to assist different groups of men and
women farmers, pastoralists, and rural young people to pursue these emerging
opportunities, by providing training materials and other support service activities
to the extension field staff. For example, in at least two regions, the regional
extension directors are encouraging and supporting the field staff as they help
farmers and pastoralists to pursue emerging markets for these new high-value
horticultural crops, livestock, and other products such as honey.

Constraints

Ethiopia’s extension system currently advocates a farmer-driven, market-oriented

approach, seeking to deliver extension services based on farmer needs and
market demands. Strong efforts have been made to establish farmer input
mechanisms (e.g., farmer input groups at FTC level), and the team discovered
some specific examples of true farmer-driven extension occurring in the field.
The system’s market orientation has made encouraging strides as well, with an
increased focus on high value and cash crops at the policy level. In some regions
and woredas, however, the implementation of these farmer-driven approaches is

58
lacking, and the policy and management focus continues to be hierarchical and
more focused on technology-transfer. In these cases, woreda- and kebele-level
extension workers are assigned responsibility for disseminating “standard”
production practices for the major food crops across the entire region instead of
following a farmer-driven approach that would include greater focus on
entrepenurialism, cash crops, and farmer group developement. Little attention is
being given by these extension field workers to a more balanced and expanded
extension program that gives attention to the intensification and diversification of
farming systems across the different woredas/kebeles of the region.

Linkages with players outside of extension also require strengthening. Since the
1960s, progress has been made to increase linkages and the relationship between
federal, regional, and woreda level extension, with much progress to date.
Limited collaboration exists between government extension, NGOs, universities,
and research institutions, with weak linkages between extension and farmer
organizations, input supply companies, and agro-processing firms (Tesfaye
2008). Specifically, the linkage gap between research and extension is the most
important to address, as technologies developed by research are currently not
informed and driven by the on-the-ground realities seen by extension field staff.
Farmers, DAs, and other field-level extension views must be incorporated into
federal and regional research priorities in order to ensure effective development
of new technologies that meet farmer needs. The establishment of the Regional
Research Extension and Farmer Linkage Councils (RREFLCs) has been
improving matters in some regions, but more progress could be made. In
particular, the RREFLCs need to foster local communities’ empowered
involvement in planning, prioritization, monitoring, and evaluation of the
programs and institutions that affect them.

Recommendations

4.3.1) “Walk the talk” on decentralization in all regions.

The extension system across all regions of Ethiopia should continue to transform
into a truly decentralized management structure. The following key roles and
responsibilities should be carried out by the different system levels:

▪ Federal-Regional-Zonal: Policy, administration, resource management,

education

59
▪ Woreda: Extension program coordination, including training and providing
technical support for DAs and helping them link with research, markets, etc.
to solve local problems and constraints
▪ Kebele: Program delivery based on farmer needs and demands, including the
intensification and diversification of farming systems in each woreda and
kebele, based on agro-ecological conditions and access to markets for
different crops/products.
As shown in Exhibit 9 below, if extension priorities are to be decentralized to
better serve the specific needs and opportunities of farm/pastoral households at
the kebele and woreda level, then these needs, opportunities, and priorities for all
major categories of farmers must be agreed to – first at the kebele level (e.g.,
through the FTC MC), and then this FTC plan should be reviewed, coordinated,
and supported by the woreda Extension Advisory Committee (WEAC).

EXHIBIT 9. Suggested farmer-driven extension management structure

At the national, regional, and zonal levels, senior extension officers will need to
continue monitoring extension activities and impacts, as well as in maintaining
adequate financial support for this increasingly decentralized extension system.
In addition, they will need to compile information on the overall performance of
the extension system and its staff in achieving national food security and
improving farm incomes. This information can then be used to demonstrate the
importance of extension and the need for continuing government support and
funding for the overall extension system. It should be noted that in other

60
countries, a continuing problem of decentralized extension systems is that no one
at the national and regional levels has up-to-date and accurate information or
valid data on these performance indicators of the extension system and its field-
level staff. As a result, it is difficult to compare the performance of these
extension systems, especially between regions and woredas. However, if basic
ICT capacity can be extended to the woreda level, then it should be possible to
ensure that up-to-date and accurate BPR information is available to assess the
performance of the SMSs, as well as the DA staff in each kebele.

4.3.2) Explore opportunities to strengthen linkages with NGOs in the

extension environment.
Opportunities exist for bringing NGO and private-sector expertise to
implementation of extension exercises, and encouraging knowledge sharing and
collaboration between these groups that are already active in the field (SG-2000
experience provides a good example of extension linking to NGO fieldwork).
Linkages in other sectors should also be explored: collaboration between
extension and public health sector efforts (e.g., nutrition efforts), for example,
could reap synergies and ultimately serve the Ethiopian public more effectively.

61
5. Agricultural Technical and Vocational
Education and Training (ATVET)

BACKGROUND
The Ethiopian government has responded to the growing farmer demand for
extension services to improve productivity by establishing Agricultural Technical
and Vocational Education Training (ATVET). ATVETs train DAs to work in
FTCs to enhance the knowledge base and skills of farmers and thereby provide
the institutional framework for increasing the efficacy of agricultural extension
services. Before the ATVETs, the universities were the only institutions offering
training at degree and diploma levels in general agriculture.

Introducing ATVETs has helped to address some of the major constraints faced
by the National Extension Intensification Program (NEIP). The NEIP drove
short-term gains in increased agricultural GDP in the 1990s, primarily through
delivery of massive production inputs including improved seeds, fertilizers and
credit (GOE 2005). This supply-driven program faced several limitations,
including marginalization of farmers outside of high-potential areas (the majority
of resource-poor farmers); an understaffed field-level extension service
characterized by passive transmission of recommended messages to farmers,
with little technology adaptation to local contexts; and eroded credibility of the
frontline field-level extension workers among smallholder farmers. The ATVET
approach aims to redress some of these limitations.

Programs and curriculum offered at ATVETs

The ATVET curriculum was first introduced in September 2000 by the Ministry
of Agriculture (now MOARD) in 28 ATVETs located across the country. In
2001, they were reduced to 25.

ATVETs seek to produce middle-level, skilled, and competent agricultural DAs

who will then teach farmers at FTCs. The ATVET colleges provide a 3-year
diploma program in one of five disciplines: Animal Science, Animal Heath,
Agricultural Cooperatives Development, Natural Resources, and Plant Science.
All ATVETs offer Animal Science, Natural Resources and Plant Science. Only a
few colleges offer Animal Health and Agricultural Cooperatives.

62
▪ Animal Health Department. The department offers basic courses on
animal anatomy and physiology; infectious and non-infectious diseases; and
drugs and their administration.
▪ Animal Science Department. The department offers courses on production
and management, range management, animal nutrition and health, animal
health and breeding, hide and skins, fisheries, and marketing. Practical skills
are enhanced by providing farmstead structures, initial establishing stock,
farm equipment and facilities, and animal feed production farms.
▪ Agricultural Cooperatives Development Department. The Agricultural
Cooperatives program is offered through two departments: Agricultural
Cooperatives Organization and Management, and Agricultural Cooperatives
Accounting and Auditing. The program focuses on social, political, and
economic consciousness; managerial, marketing, and controlling
capabilities; salesmanship; and marketing management, accounting, and
auditing.
▪ Natural Resource Department. The department provides basic courses on
the development and sustainable use of natural resources (forests, soil, non-
timber forest products, alternative energy sources, etc.) and water harvesting
technologies. Practical skills are developed by providing tree nursery farms;
agro-forestation/reforestation demonstration units; soil and water
conservation demonstration units; and equipment and facilities.
▪ Plant Science Department. The department offers courses on the basic
concepts of plant developments, external and internal structures, growing
media and their constituents, production technologies and their
management, major pests and their controlling methods, post-harvest
handling, and processing techniques. Focus is put on production
technologies of cereals, pulse crops, oil crops, vegetables, root tubers, fruit
crops, industrial crops, and fiber crops. Practical skills are achieved by
offering agronomy crops farms, fruit crop production, horticultural crops
farms, research plots, and farm equipment and facilities.
▪ Basic and Supportive Courses Department. This department offers basic
and supportive courses. The courses include basic science courses such as
Computer Application; English and Math; supportive courses such as
Agricultural Extension, Agricultural Cooperatives, Civics and Ethical
Education, Pedagogy, and Physical Education; and business courses such as
Farm Management and general business.

63
Students in each discipline take 16-17 credits per semester. At the end of the
course, the students are expected to have completed 76 credit hours, fulfilling the
requirement by the Ministry of Education (MOE) for accreditation for all
diploma programs in the country, including the ATVET program.

Institutional coordination of ATVETs

There are two classes of ATVET colleges: federal and regional colleges. There
are seven federal colleges (four from large regions and three from emerging
regions) that report to and are managed by the MOARD. The rest of the colleges
(“regional colleges”) are managed by the BOARDs or the MOE through the
TVET Commission or TVET Agency. The regions are mandated to decide which
institution the ATVETS report to.

Each college is internally managed by the College Academic Council consisting

of the Dean of the college (Chairperson); two Deputy Deans (one in charge of
Academic Affairs and another in charge of Administrative and Development);
Heads of the academic and research units; two representatives of the teachers;
Heads of the Registrar and documentation office; Dean of Students; a Practical
Training Program Coordinator; and one representative of the college student
community. The council is guided by Academic Rules and Guidelines prepared
by the MOARD. Each college has powers and duties to design and implement
training programs based on the standards issued by the MOARD and based on
the needs of the agricultural development of the country.

Growth of DA training
The 25 ATVETs started graduating DAs in 2004. Exhibit 10 shows that over
8,000 DAs have been qualifying and graduating every year. For most ATVET
colleges, over 1,000 students have graduated since the establishment of the
training program. By 2008 the colleges had produced roughly 63,000 DAs
(12 percent of them women).

64
EXHIBIT 10. Female and male ATVET college graduates, 2004-08

Source: ATVET head, Addis Ababa

Other ATVET services: research, direct extension,

ongoing training, and seed multiplication
In addition to their training role, the ATVET colleges have expanded their
mission to include provision of nonformal specialized short-term training, skill
gap training, entrepreneurial training, applied technology transfer, and services
for farmers, agriculture businesses, and the public sector (Kreuchauf, 2008).
Other services that ATVETs cover include:

▪ Research activities in the areas of crop science, animal science, and NRM.
Some colleges have started research works in collaboration with the Science
and Technology Commission. The research undertaken includes sericulture,
water harvesting, irrigation, and cropping systems.
▪ Providing direct extension services, sometimes with NGOs, to farmers
through FTCs for both small and large private farms. The ATVETs work
closely with farmers to provide technical information in crop production,
livestock production and natural resource management. NGOs like FAO,
Farm Africa, Red Cross, and Bio-Safe have been implementing very
innovative extension (Aberra and Teshome, 2009). Some ATVETs link with
NGOs working nearby to share information and experience. The limited
extension provided by the ATVETs (and NGOs) complements the extension
provided by the DAs.

65
▪ Providing short-term training: for DAs and Para-veterinary technicians.
Some ATVETs arrange for short-term and in-service training for the field-
level extension agents. This provides an opportunity for the field staff to
upgrade their knowledge and skills.
▪ Multiplying seed for farmers. Though the ATVETs’ mandate is not in input
supply, some colleges have been supplementing the seed supply industry by
producing seed and selling it to farmers.

ATVET STRENGTHS
The existing ATVET system has a number of strengths, which provide a sound
base upon which to build:

▪ Physical ATVET network. In six to seven years, Ethiopia has rapidly

established 25 ATVETS, which have together produced roughly 63,000
newly trained DAs. They provide access to education, through the FTCs, for
adult learners who traditionally do not participate in the formal learning
system. Almost all have adequately furnished classrooms, and most have
basic library and laboratory facilities.
▪ Broad ATVET service offering. As well as offering DA training, several
colleges are providing in-service training, refresher courses, direct
extension, and a range of short courses in technical areas such as fruits and
vegetables (agronomy or crop science), beekeeping, poultry, dairy, and the
fattening of both beef and small ruminants.
▪ Qualified instructors. The ATVETs are increasingly being staffed by well-
qualified instructors. Exhibit 11 lays out a sample of 5 ATVETs’ instructor
details over time. Most teaching personnel in these ATVETS are B.Sc.
holders, and this number has on the whole been increasing since 2001/02
(Ethiopia calendar year 1994). The number of women B.Sc. instructors is
also increasing slightly, though the number still remains small on a relative
basis. The number of M.Sc. holders has also been increasing gradually.

66
EXHIBIT 11. Categories of teaching staff in five ATVETs in Gewane (Afar),
Chiro (Oromia), Wukro (Tigray), Dilla (SNNPR), and Bure (Amhara)

Major Categories of  2‐3 yr Ag Diploma from  B.Sc. degree M.S.c  Ph.D. 

Teaching Staff  college/University  degree  degree 
Year   EC (GC)  M  F  T  M  F  T  M  F  T  M  F  T 
1994 (2001/02)  8  1 9 64 1 65 ‐ ‐  ‐  1  ‐  1
1995 (2002/03)  9  ‐ 9 127 4 131 ‐ ‐  ‐  1  ‐  1
1996 (2003/04)  10  ‐  10  188  6  194  1  ‐  1  1  ‐  1 
1997 (2004/05)  7  1 8 190 13 203 3 ‐  3  1  ‐  1
1998 (2005/06)  13  1 14 194 12 206 4 ‐  4  1  ‐  1
1999 (2006/07)  22  2 24 186 11 197 6 ‐  6  ‐  ‐  ‐
2000 (2007/08)  17  2 19 174 13 187 9 1  10  ‐  ‐  ‐
Source: Authors   EC ‐ Ethiopian Calendar GC – General Calendar

▪ DFs. Some ATVETs have DFs for practical training as well as income
generation. The DFs’ output includes food, cash crops, and livestock. The
produce from these farms is consumed by the colleges, which reduces
college expenses – and in some cases the produce is sold at local markets.
▪ Linkage creation. Creating active and meaningful collaboration among
DAs, NGOs, and communities of farmers, regardless of educational level,
language, culture, technology, and geography. Some ATVETs are involved
in community projects which draw DAs, NGOs, and farmers together to
learn about new technologies and practices in crop production, livestock
production, and/or NRM through workshops and field days.
The strengths of the existing ATVET system have already served farmers well.
The education and training offered has helped to strengthen agricultural services
and systems for improved agricultural productivity by enhancing the capacity of
farmers to become aware of and to adopt economically viable and
environmentally sustainable technologies and practices. Some colleges have
become true centers of innovation for dissemination to farmers (see sidebar,
Adaptation and dissemination of mushroom). These strengths provide a strong
foundation on which to build.

67
ADAPTATION AND DISSEMINATION OF MUSHROOM
About mushrooms in Assosa: Mushroom is a delicacy eaten by many people in the region and the
market demand for it is high. It is usually collected from the forest and farmlands during the rainy
season.
Assosa ATVET mushroom program: Assosa ATVET has started an innovative mushroom enterprise
for training purposes as well as disseminating the technology to farmers and rural communities

▪ Domestication: The college first tried to domesticate the local varieties known in the local
language (Berta) as Abralu and Affifi. The performance was quite encouraging and motivated a
search for ways of increasing its production. This has extended to exotic varieties, P. florida and
P. sajor-caju, which have done very well on natural straw, teff straw, ‘Geraba of chat’ as well as
bamboo leaves. The yield by these exotic varieties has been very encouraging, achieving 1-
1.5kg/bag within a time frame of 20-24 days compared to 400gm/bag within three months for the
local varieties. Harvesting can also be done 4-6 times from the same media making it very
attractive to farmers.

▪ Food and Medicinal benefits: The mushroom has great food and medicinal benefits. The
mushroom contains proteins, vitamins (thiamine-B1, riboflavin-B2, niacin and biotin), minerals
(potassium 45%, iron, phosphorus, sodium, magnesium and calcium) and does not contain
cholesterol. These and other enzymatic contents of the mushroom make it a highly medicinal
product.

▪ Technology: The mushroom technology is simple to apply. It requires chopping of the straw,
boiling it for half an hour and watering it for five days. The raw materials required are all
agricultural wastes which are easily available. The process requires just about 23 days for the
mushroom to be ready for harvesting. It is an appropriate technology that is environmentally
friendly, less costly and compatible with the farmers’ farming systems. It is an innovation that can
be up scaled among many farmers and efforts made to tap into both rural and urban markets.

▪ Training: The college has put together a training package and has trained more than 50 students
on mushroom production. In 2008 the college trained farmers from 40 farmer training centers
(FTCs) from Assosa woreda through a grant provided by the Ethiopian Science and Technology
Commission. A workshop for NGOs and farmers was held to check the potential and receptivity
of the mushroom. Following the workshop, there has been increased demand for further training
on the mushroom. Three NGOs have invited the instructor to train organized women groups and
farmers on mushroom production. So far the college has trained 20 women in one of the kebeles
in Assosa supported by the Zonal Office of Agriculture. Two demonstrations have also been
established at Kubrehamsha camp, one for the refugee camp and one for the local farmers.

▪ Dissemination: The college has prepared a training manual in Amharic entitled ‘Enguday
besaynsawi menetser’ which contains practical guidelines on mushroom production and handling
of the mushroom during harvesting. Another manual has been prepared in English titled
“Practical handout for mushroom production’ to be used in FTCs. Mushroom seed (spawn) is now
being distributed to farmers neighboring the College and the demand for the seed is increasing.
Source: Authors

68
CONSTRAINTS OF AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ATVET
In this section we outline some of the important constraints in the ATVET
system and the recommendations that will increase its effectiveness at training
DAs into farmer-centric, market-driven, and entrepreneurial support for the
nation’s famers:

Constraint: Insufficient and/or poorly prioritized financial

resources
The major sources of ATVET funding are the MOARD, BOARD, RCBP, and, to
a very limited extent, the colleges themselves. We heard in our interviews with
College Deans that these financial resources are not always sufficient to meet the
needs of the college For example, Internet connectivity is important in enhancing
access to information for teaching and learning purposes; however, while most
Colleges have computer labs, they do not have the resources to support Internet
connectivity.

Additionally, ATVETs are not adequately prioritizing the use of available

resources, leading to operational shortfalls despite operational and performance
planning.

Further, some ATVETs are not doing a good job of identifying strategic gaps
where there is a compelling case for more funding, and not many colleges are
seeking other sustainable ways of generating funds to supplement their financial
resources. Doing so requires ATVET colleges to become more entrepreneurial,
and for it to be permissible for them to reinvest revenues generated from their
entrepreneurial initiatives back into the Colleges, which provides an incentive to
innovate.

Recommendation 5.1.1) Revamp the ATVET system

Enhance the sustainability of the ATVET system by revising the number and
mandate of ATVETS, and exploring opportunities to increase individual ATVET
college sustainability.

The current ATVET system has largely achieved its overall goal, having trained
roughly 63,000 DAs for service. Going forward, the mandate of the ATVET
system will change due to the decreased need for additional DAs and the
increasing need for higher skill levels to serve farmers. Different scenarios and
options exist for the future use of the colleges. A recent study by the RCBP has
proposed three options for future use of ATVETs (Kreuchaf, 2008). One option
is to use colleges to top up DA numbers following attrition (8 percent, or around

69
4,800 new DAs) and to provide annual skill gap training for existing DAs. About
seven colleges are proposed for turnover training and two to three colleges for
skill gap training. The rest could then be transferred to other Ministries (e.g.,
Ministry of Education), converted into regional TVETs, or transformed into
private institutes.

Another option would be that the 25 colleges continue to provide DA training

and continuing education, according to regional turnover. In this option each
college should also provide a full range of programs for rural youth and private
sector training.

The third option, which combines the first and second options, is to concentrate
DA training in selected colleges (one to two in each region). The other colleges
(15-16) would then be transformed to ATVET institutes for delivery of massive
lower-level programs; nonformal, short-term training; and business services.

This report recommends further enquiry into this aspect of the ATVET network.

Recommendation 5.1.2) Equipping ATVET colleges for success

Strategically equip active ATVET colleges with needed facilities and equipment
to improve training. These investments may include investment in Internet access
(ICT), required textbooks, reference materials, lab materials, and equipment to
support study of the physical, chemical, and biological processes of agriculture.
Other facilities might include a milk processing unit, veterinary clinic/laboratory,
agronomy and soil laboratory, soil and water engineering units, and a
greenhouse. Farm demonstration equipment, machinery, and implements will
also be required.

The funding for this equipment program may be made available by the operating
budget released by the expected decrease in the number of ATVETs as the DA
training volumes round down. Partnerships with universities, research centers,
and NGOs that encourage facility and experience sharing may provide another
avenue.

Constraint: Insufficient practical curriculum

The current curriculum for the three main disciplines (crop science, plant
science, and NRM) leaves little room for soft-skill training, does not provide for
sufficient practical training, and is not sufficiently responsive to Ethiopia’s
evolving extension needs.

70
▪ Little soft-skill development. The curriculum contains few, if any, courses
such as communication skills, social marketing, and community
mobilization.
▪ Insufficient practical training. While the existing DA curricula indicate an
ideal ratio of 30:70, theory to practice, most officials we interviewed (at
BOARD, College administrators, etc.) indicated that the style of training is
predominantly theory-based and with limited practical due to lack of
equipment, labs, tools, practical tasks, and teaching materials. Some
colleges have poorly equipped laboratories and limited workshop materials.
Physical libraries exist but often with inadequate or irrelevant textbooks.
Equipment for practical training is often rudimentary. Some DFs are
adequately resourced, but most remain poorly developed, preventing student
DAs from developing fully into skilled, competent, and efficient agricultural
practitioners who can win the confidence of farmers.
▪ Insufficient evolution to market demands. As Ethiopia’s agricultural
system evolves, the extension system will also need to evolve to a more
market-oriented system that is geared towards helping farmers adapt to
rapidly changing markets. This requires a curriculum that is more market-
driven, supportive of diversified crops, entrepreneurial, and farmer-centered,
and one that supports cooperative management. The current curriculum
contains few, if any, issues more typically championed by women, such as
household nutrition, sanitation, and hygiene areas.
▪ Too much specialization too early. Currently the training is structured to
produce specialists. In the old system before the ATVETs were established,
the trained frontline extension agents were generalists who were expected to
serve the farmers on all issues raised. Our assessment has raised the
question of whether DAs should specialize or be generalists, with more
attention to farm management and marketing.
▪ Low attention to diversified farming systems. Agriculture in Ethiopia is
characterized by mixed farming system of crop and livestock production.
The livestock subsector is depended upon by majority of smallholder farms
for power, cultivation, and transport of goods; it also makes significant
contribution to the food supply in terms of meat and dairy products, as well
as to export in terms of hides and skins, which make up the second major
export category (Belay and Abebaw, 2004). Within the mixed farming
complexes, cereal crops account for about three-fourths of the planted area;

71
 while the remaining cultivated area is devoted to the production of other
annual and perennial crops such as pulses, oil crops, and coffee. As farmers
begin to intensify and/or diversify their farming systems, DAs must
understand more fully how these different crops and livestock systems link
together. Currently, training does not develop DA skills in high-value crops
or products and hence fails to prepare them for effectively working with
farmers in diversified farming systems.
Recommendation 5.2.1) Overhaul ATVET curriculum for farmer needs
Revise the curriculum to make it market-driven and client-responsive. To do this
the Ethiopian government needs to consider involving all the stakeholders
(ATVET, extension bureau, researchers, farmers) and other stakeholders
(donors) in a curriculum review. The review should remove unnecessary courses
and consider including courses on extension soft skills, advanced technical skills,
business management, entrepreneurship, and farmer group development.

Recommendation 5.2.2)
Enhance instructor capabilities by providing in-service and short-term training to
develop instructors’ practical training skills, basic entrepreneurial skills, college
leadership, and management skills. Instructors currently have little opportunity to
continue to develop their skills, conduct research, and share learnings, and a
curriculum shift will create further need for an instructor skills upgrade. In-
service and short-term training for instructors can help address this need and
better serve DA education.

Constraint: Incomplete and untimely apprenticeship

program
The duration of the ATVET programs is three years, with two years in the
college and about a year’s practical training (apprenticeship) in the woredas and
FTCs. The ATVETs implement a series of practical training programs in
collaboration with the rural community, when trainees go out for the
apprenticeship programs. The practical training DAs receive focuses on
production activities, but provides limited exposure to markets and market
linkages. Unfortunately, the apprentice program is also held during off-season in
October and ends in June when farmers are beginning to engage in main farming
activities.

Recommendation 5.3.1) Improve apprenticeship program

Improve apprenticeship program to provide apprentices with strong practical-
based experience. The students need to get hands-on experience working with

72
and learning from progressive farmers. During the apprenticeship period when
most of the actual extension and training activities are carried out, the student
should be assigned to work closely with strong DAs and SMSs when they
actually carry out specific training activities, so they can assist and learn from
these extension activities. This should be scheduled when farmers are doing main
farming activities. The apprenticeship program needs strong supervision by both
the SMS and ATVET college instructors. There is also need for a feedback
mechanism to identify gaps and training needs by the DAs.

Constraint: Weak linkages between the ATVET Colleges

and the agricultural extension system, research, and
universities
Several colleges do not have a systematic linkage with the extension system that
absorbs its products. For most ATVETS the FTCs are not linked to the colleges
to provide opportunities to DAs to improve on their practical applications. They
also do not have effective linkages with research centers and universities. These
poor linkages mean the ATVETs do not receive the feedback to help them to
adjust and deliver services most up-to-date and relevant to the extension system.

Recommendation 5.4.1) Strengthen ATVET linkages

Strengthen linkages between the ATVETs, the agricultural extension system,
universities, and agricultural research. Examples of this might take the form of
short-term courses and in-service practical skill training for DAs and SMSs;
SMSs being invited as guest speakers at Colleges; Colleges supporting woredas
in preparing extension materials; ATVETs linked with research centers and
Research Extension Farmer Linkage Councils; ATVET colleges formalizing
joint research programs with research institutions; or ATVETS becoming
involved in FRGs.

ATVETS could also explore linkages at the interface between academia and
industry (e.g., rural technology centers and agro-processing firms), to support
strengthening of innovation and entrepreneurship in the ATVET network. Some
ATVETs, including Chiro ATVET and Assela, have formal links with national
Universities that have led to greater collaboration and opportunities for faculty
and staff development. ATVETs could also explore linkages with international
educational institutions. These types of linkages should be encouraged across the
system.

73
6. The enabling environment
The country-wide enabling environment in which extension operates is critical to
extension efforts fulfilling the government mandate of increased food security
and the desire for increases in farmer income. The impact of enacting the full set
of recommendations within this report will be limited unless these efforts are
accompanied by improvements to the Ethiopian enabling environment. In
consultations with stakeholders and extension experts, the enabling environment
was named as one of the greatest challenges facing the extension system today,
and many enabling environment elements were discussed in detail

Critical elements of an agro-economy’s enabling environment include

agricultural production enablers (seed, fertilizer and other inputs, water
management, credit, farmer producer groups), market access enablers (transport,
markets, value chains), and economy-wide enablers (strong institutions,
government policy, infrastructure). This section will discuss select components
of Ethiopia’s enabling environment in detail.

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION ENABLERS

Seed
There are many challenges hindering the Ethiopian seed system. While Ethiopian
seed research is quite established, and has released hundreds of new varieties,
farmer adoption rates of improved seed – even in reliable rainfed areas – are low.
Around 12 to 15 percent of farmers use improved wheat and maize; less than
one percent of farmers used improved seed for teff, barley, and sorghum
(Spielman et al. 2009).

This large disparity between seed supplied and demanded is driven largely by
supply-side market failures (Spielman et al. 2009). In every region that the team
visited, the problem of obtaining improved seed was mentioned by different
actors. The Ethiopian Seed Enterprise (ESE) is responsible for responding to
seed demand in the country. The ESE produces and multiplies seed, mainly
through its own farms but also through subcontracting. The EIAR is also
responsible for developing improved seed varieties and foundation seed. While
private companies (e.g., Pioneer) exist, they play a very small role in producing
and distributing seed in Ethiopia.

74
Commentators point to a variety of issues driving seed issues in Ethiopia,
including insufficient market transparency; ineffective and inefficient seed
quality control; inadequate financing and lack of competition from the private
sector; an absence of small seed companies to bridge the informal farmer seed
systems to a more commercial industry; the ESE’s profits channeling to the
national budget rather than into investment back into ESE business development;
seed pricing structures that do not incentivize farmers to reliably sell into the
seed supply system and very high rates of seed recycling (Spielman et al. 2009).

Fertilizer and other inputs

Ethiopia ranks amongst the countries in Africa with the highest depletion of soil
nutrients (more than 60 kg/ha). As a land-locked country with difficult
infrastructure, it also has low fertilizer use compared to other developing nations.
Ethiopia’s fertilizer industry has traditionally suffered from issues similar to the
seed system, particularly as they relate to distribution. The GOE attempted to
liberalize its fertilizer distribution in the late 1990s (Spielman et al. 2009);
however, private companies did not remain long in the fertilizer business due to
government control of marketing and prices. Today obtaining fertilizer is both
difficult and cost-prohibitive to most smallholder farmers, yet productivity gains
depend on this access. Smallholder access to fertilizer will be critical to solve if
Ethiopia is to see continuing increases in productivity; with staple crop yields
being most severely limited by soil degradation.

Water management and irrigation

Ethiopia is often referred to as the “water tower of Africa”, with considerable
natural renewable water resources, including source contributions of 65 percent
of the total average flow of the Nile. Despite this natural endowment of
resources, Ethiopia has some of the lowest per-capita storage in the world, with
less than 100 m3 of water storage per capita compared to ~750 m3 for South
Africa and 4,500 m3 in Australia. Currently, potential irrigable land in Ethiopia
is clearly underdeveloped. Less than 6 percent of Ethiopia’s irrigable land is
under irrigation, while figures for neighboring Sudan are 14 percent, and
32 percent for Madagascar.

Rainfall patterns in the Greater Horn of Africa are exceptionally variable in

timing and across years, and when combined with low storage, such variability
truly leaves Ethiopia “hostage to hydrology” (Grey and Sadoff, World Bank,
2006). This variability has a twofold effect: direct productivity impacts of

75
hydropower-dependent industries and irrigators, when water needs are not met in
critical parts of the season; and reduced adoption of improved inputs (e.g.,
seed/fertilizer) among farmers in rainfed areas due to the risk of crop failure. A
shift from rainfed to fully irrigated or deficit-irrigated cropping would increase
food security. This was confirmed in a recent International Water Management
Institute (IMWI) study that observed a positive impact of irrigation investments
on poverty. These impacts were observed anecdotally by the team in the field. In
Afar Region, the team observed pastoralists transforming into agro-pastoralists
because of an irrigation system developed at the Awash River. Similarly, in
Tigray, due to heavy emphasis by extension on water harvesting, women were
able to grow high-value vegetables close to their homes. These examples show
that water management is key to increasing production, and that it is possible to
implement successfully in very different contexts.

However, the IWMI report also pointed out that past investment in irrigation
largely had a negative return on investment. With limited financial resources,
there is little room for error in allocating investment capital. There is currently no
mechanism for prioritizing and optimizing investments in water and agriculture
to have the most economic benefit.

Farmer credit and financing

Ethiopia’s farmers have seasonal or irregular cash flows, uncertain harvests, and,
in the current land-ownership construct, little to no physical collateral.
Encouragingly, Ethiopia has a well-established microfinance law and has
substantially liberalized its financial sector, being one of the first African
countries to create a special framework for micro-finance institutions (MFIs).
Farmers’ access to agri-credit (and financial services more broadly), however,
remains inadequate: of the estimated 6 million potential micro-finance clients in
Ethiopia, just over 1 million are currently served. There is also very significant
regional variability in the availability of finance institutes, and some regions
(e.g., Afar, Somali) have hardly any access at all. Additionally, cultural
constraints in certain regions also prevent farmers from using micro-credit.

There are several reasons offered for this, including remnant challenges in the
legal and regulatory operating environment, which still requires all micro-lending
organizations to be supervised by the National Bank of Ethiopia, and to be
100 percent owned by Ethiopian nationals; that minimum deposit rates of 3
percent must be obtained; and that private MFIs must all rely upon the slow and
bureaucratic Commercial Bank of Ethiopia for their own cash flow needs.

76
Further, government-sponsored MFIs are said to keep interest rates artificially
low, crowding out all but the most (and reportedly very substantially more)
efficient private MFI enterprises (Druschel, 2005). They allow village councils to
assign individuals to village loan groups, rather than allowing groups to form
themselves (or for individuals to transact independently), and do not always offer
products tailored to farmers’ needs (in relation to timing, length, and amounts).
Credit access varies considerably by region, hampered in part by distribution
costs (in remote and inaccessible regions) and system oversight.

Fixing the finance issues is crucial for transforming the agriculture system, as it
forms the basis for entrepreneurship on the farmer level. The Ethiopian extension
system itself stands to benefit from greater available of financing for agriculture,
as woreda governments and DAs could utilize micro-financing to strengthen
FTC resources and stimulate revenue-generation at the FTC level. Micro-
financing also has the co-benefit of stimulating the formation of farmer groups,
as this is usually a prerequisite for issuing credit.

In addition to this farmer-level financing need, financing gaps perpetuate for

Ethiopia’s broader agriculture system, including processing, storage, and
transport infrastructure financing.

Farmer cooperatives and producer groups

Cooperatives traditionally serve an important role of farmer organization in
agricultural economies. Many farmers in Ethiopia are members of cooperatives
that are closely linked to local government administration. Cooperatives are
found in nearly every kebele; sometimes two to three kebeles may organize one.
Most cooperatives are for inputs distribution and marketing. Cooperatives form
into unions, which are often responsible for collating and aggregating demand for
seed, credit, and other inputs.

Beyond cooperatives, however, there are very few traditional farmer groups that
exist at the local level. Cooperatives are the usual mode of forming groups
around agricultural production. However, due to negative experiences through
cooperatives under the previous government, many farmers view cooperatives
with distrust or as simply a tool of the government. Other local traditional groups
that exist in rural Ethiopia include iquob (savings and loans groups) and idur
(burial societies). These types of groups can be targeted for building capacity
among farmers and increasing levels of empowerment. At the same time, much
more group development, especially producer groups, needs to take place among

77
rural Ethiopian farmers, so that farmers can take advantage of economies of
scale, access information, provide feedback to the government, and receive social
support.

MARKET ACCESS ENABLERS

Market access enablers are critical for farmers to reap the benefits of increases in
production. Reducing market transaction costs, increasing value addition,
securing and increasing demand for goods, and promoting an enabling
environment for market access including market information, storage, and
transport infrastructure are essential components of a sustainable agricultural
transformation. While some regions benefit greatly from proximity to large
markets and low transportation costs, strengthening and supporting these value
chains will greatly increase the impact extension can have on the Ethiopian
economy. Without these enablers in place, concerted productivity measures risk
generating produce with nowhere to go, and subsequent erosion in the incentives
to continue them.

While Ethiopian agriculture suffers from the range of market access problems
pandemic across SSA, access to demand centers and transportation/transaction
costs are particularly limiting. Remote regions of Ethiopia (e.g., Gambella
region) suffer from very limited access to major markets, with high shipping
costs and high transaction costs for obtaining necessary agricultural inputs. Due
to their location and distance from major demand centers, cropping systems are
limited as well, and tend to focus on staple crops, with little emphasis in high-
value food crops that could help generate higher farm incomes. Without
investments in transportation infrastructure, these costs will continue to stunt
growth and development in the far reaches of Ethiopia.

Specific crop value chains and value-added practices also need to be

strengthened and encouraged in Ethiopia. Interviews for this project identified
post-harvest management and post-harvest processing as two areas with potential
opportunities for investment at this time. The NGO community in particular
views this as an area that can be strengthened and provide greater productivity
and prices for agricultural products. Investments by NGOs in coffee post-harvest
management, for instance, have led to increased prices and increased access to
international markets for Ethiopian smallholders; these types of practices could
have similar impact on other commodities and cash crops.

78
ECONOMY-WIDE ENABLERS
In the broader context of the Ethiopian economy, economy-wide enablers
including strong policymaking, institutions, and infrastructure ensure that the
broad economic system works for Ethiopian farmers. Policy and institutions play
a direct role in managing and prioritizing the many interests and actors within the
economic system, impacting how smallholders compete and interact within the
market. Ethiopian agricultural policy will need to continue to focus on the
smallholder and his success if the goals of extension are to be realized. Future
investments in system-wide infrastructure can unlock even greater potential for
Ethiopian agriculture as the overall economy strengthens. As Ethiopia’s economy
continues to grow, the agricultural system and its place in the broader economy
will require continued support from these economy-wide enablers.

From a system-wide perspective, three policy areas should be considered in

greater detail.

1) Land tenure- Land tenure in Ethiopia is directed entirely by the government,

with smallholder farmers “leasing” land from the government. This policy,
while allowing for government control of land resources, limits the ability and
motivation of farmers to invest in their farms and limits their ability to gain
credit, using land as collateral. If today’s farmers had ownership rights they
could rent, sell, or mortgage their land. The Ethiopia Land Tenure and
Administration Program (ELTAP) has recently started a process of land
registration and certification, which is hoped will improve tenure security and
investment. The GOE should continue to push for these types of positive changes
to land tenure issues.

2) Market orientation- The official government policy of Ethiopia has a

“commercialization of agriculture” focus (see Gebre-ab 2006), yet some
activities of the GOE limit the market orientation of the current agriculture
system. The government, pursuing nationwide food security initiatives, tends to
crowd out private sector players (see Spielman et al. 2008). Most agricultural
processes are dependent upon state intervention (e.g. fertilizer, credit).
Furthermore, the private sector is underdeveloped in its capacity to participate.
As the Ethiopian economy continues to grow, there will be increasing market
opportunities for different type of high-value crop, livestock and other products
(e.g. honey, mushrooms, etc.) that will increase farm income, and policies should
be tailored to support these new market opportunities. In the process, farmers are
also learning that they need to organize into producer groups to facilitate the

79
marketing of these products. This emerging strategy should be encouraged,
supported and facilitated by the GOE and its agricultural extension system.

3) Trade policy- As the agriculture economy continues to strengthen,

international trade can result in important new market opportunities for farmers.
Coffee and livestock products already dominate Ethiopia's export market, but
new export products and market opportunities are emerging (e.g. flowers, honey,
etc.), especially where Ethiopia has a comparative advantage. Trade policy
should support this move and help Ethiopian farmers to start producing for these
emerging international markets. The GOE’s submission of a Memorandum of
Foreign Trade Regime (MFTR) for the World Trade Organization, which opens
the long journey to WTO accession, suggests an increasing openness to trade that
would increase competitiveness of Ethiopian agricultural products. In addition,
current anecdotal evidence suggests that existing rules could be strengthened- for
instance, farmers reported that the export process for hides and livestock was
cumbersome and difficult to manage. Streamlining current policies and working
with farmers in pursuing emerging trade will make Ethiopian agriculture more
competitive on a global scale.

IMPLICATIONS AND ACTIONS FOR ETHIOPIAN

ENABLING ENVIRONMENT
While the enabling environment in which extension operates is not without its
challenges, steps are being taken today to ensure that Ethiopia’s overall
agriculture system, policies, and business environment are working in line with
extension approaches for greatest impact.

Two specific programs that are designed to strengthen the overall Ethiopian
enabling environment are the upcoming World Bank Agricultural Growth
Program and the Food Security Program. Both of these programs are seeking to
analyze constraints within the country-wide enabling environment systems such
as seed, soil health, water management, credit, and market access, and will look
to strengthen these systems with targeted investments over the next five-year
period. These investments can potentially solve some of the major constraints
that have a negative impact on extension services, such as limited access to seed
and other high-quality inputs for farmer demonstration and technology transfer.

The GOE must also play a critical role in strengthening these systems. Working
with donor organizations on economy-wide projects, government will play a
critical role in ensuring that desired outcomes are achievable and that the system

80
responds to new demands in the enabling environment. Government has a
particular role to play in economic and trade policy, particularly as it relates to
private-sector involvement in agriculture. The rapidly-growing floral industry in
Ethiopia is a good example of government policy allowing private-sector entities
to strengthen and stimulate growth – continued strengthening in this line, with an
aim towards supporting smallholder farmers, can have a major impact on the
overall agriculture environment and on extension’s efficacy in particular.

81
7. Issues and trade-offs in
systems sustainability
Despite expectations that the existing extension system will yield ambitious gains
in productivity and agricultural growth, it also raises issues of long-term
sustainability. If the existing field extension system continues to grow from the
current 8,500 FTCs to the envisaged 15,000 FTCs, staffed at similar levels (3
DAs per FTC) and supported by a similar arrangement of woreda-level SMSs,
supervisors, and regional administration, there are significant implications for
long-term government resources. Earlier chapters on the field extension system,
ATVETs and training, and institutional coordination also imply new investments
in both physical and human resources. Taken together, the current extension
system and the recommendations outlined in this report have serious resource
implications in the longer term.

The trajectory raises two questions addressed in this chapter:

▪ How can we increase the sustainability of the current extension system,

and what are the trade-offs?
▪ What are alternatives over the long-term for a more cost-effective
extension system that continues to meet the needs of Ethiopia’s farming
families?
Sustainability has two dimensions. On the one hand, extension systems balance
the need to reduce costs with alternatives that recover operating expenses, and in
some cases, generate revenue. On the other hand, extension systems are
measured by their ability to enhance the productive capacities and livelihoods of
their clients, primarily small farm households, and contribute to broader
agricultural growth. This chapter illustrates how these different options can be
mutually reinforcing: enhanced impact at the farm-level and reducing systems
costs; working in tandem. One such case (referenced in section 4) is illustrated
here.

At an innovative FTC in the Atsibi woreda, Tigray Region, an entrepreneurial

DA shared his model. In 2006, the FTC contained only the basic infrastructure –
a classroom and office in a dryland DF. Through a local micro-credit
organization, he purchased a low-cost drip irrigation system for 950 birr. He
planted tomatoes and midway through the second of three annual harvests he
repaid the loan. With new confidence, he took a second and larger credit to

82
purchase a cow, and began to diversify his horticulture production into new
crops. The revenue from dairy and horticulture created a surplus to reinvest in the
FTC, leading to more entrepreneurial demonstrations and more sophisticated
water-harvesting. By 2009, the FTC had built four housing units, purchased a
bicycle for transport, and begun diversifying their livestock and cropping
systems with spices and improved staples, as well as beekeeping. The
entrepreneurial impact extends to farmers: 70 farmers now have credit for drip
irrigation; beekeeping now complements traditional staples; and livestock
practices are changing to zero-grazing. Farmers attend FTC classes in
overwhelming numbers and DAs have transport to reach their villages on a
regular schedule.

With entrepreneurial DAs, the FTC is both sustainable and having high impact
on farm household income. Sustainable best practices already exist within the
current extension system – identifying the characteristics of these successes in
diverse farming systems and demonstrating how to bring efforts to scale should
be the goal. This section looks at sustainability practices in two parts. Part I looks
at trade-offs in the current system. Part II considers factors that affect how public
extension can evolve in the longer term.

SUSTAINABILITY AND TRADE-OFFS IN THE CURRENT FIELD

EXTENSION SYSTEM
The commitment to strengthen the extension systems through investments in
needed infrastructure, resources, and capability-building for field staff raises a
wide set of questions on sustainability and the interest of GOE to maintain this
level of investment. A set of key principles is needed for GOE at the federal,
regional, and woreda-level to understand the factors and make these investment
decisions. Exhibit 12 illustrates the cost structure of an FTC .

EXHIBIT 12. Cost structure for FTCs

1 FTC basic infrastructure

2 DA salaries

3 FTC revenue
generation
Infrastructure for
DA effectiveness 4

83
All FTCs require the basic infrastructure described in Box 1. These fixed costs
for construction typically cover the building itself and 1.0 to -2.5 ha of
communal land provided by the local kebele, with labor costs and time for
constructing the buildings being donated by the local farmers themselves. The
other costs, especially cement and roofing materials, are financed by the
MOARD with resources provided at the woreda level. Box 2 describes the
recurring costs of DA salaries. These are funded by federal budget decentralized
to the woreda-administration. The potential for FTCs to generate revenue is
described in Box 3. Similar to the Atsibi FTC, this includes market opportunities
from crop and livestock demonstrations to reinvest in the FTC; options also
include revenue from input supply, fee-for-service activity, and linkages to
output markets. Finally, Box 4 describes the infrastructure for DA effectiveness,
which includes all resource costs (beyond the basic infrastructure) that enhance a
DA’s ability for farm-level impact and revenue generation (e.g., transport and
demonstration costs). At the FTC level, since basic infrastructure costs are
largely fixed, resource trade-offs occur between staffing, the ability of FTCs to
generate revenue, and the infrastructure for DA effectiveness.

Trade-offs in FTC staffing from 3 to 2 DAs can

enhance sustainability
The current plan staffs each FTC with three DAs, with each DA specialized in
either livestock, crop production, or NRM (Box 2). Lessons from the T&V
model from the mid-1970s to the mid-1990s, and regional extension examples in
South and East Asia, illustrate how high staff salary budgets constrain the
resources necessary to invest in areas that enhance production: crop and livestock
demonstrations, mobility of DAs to reach farmers, communications, and
resources for training and skill development. The issue at hand here is not an
overinvestment in personnel; rather it is the trade-off between salaries for
permanent staff and other operational costs. Operating costs are easier to
minimize than permanent salary costs, so often these costs are the first to go
when extension systems are faced with budget cuts. Unfortunately, this trade-off
renders the entire system ineffective with no access to necessary resources. In
some instances, the more sustainable decision may be to limit staffing of DAs to
2 per FTC, thus freeing up cost savings that can be used for operational purposes.

These cost savings can then be reinvested in infrastructure for DA effectiveness

(Box 4). Interviews, focus groups, and workshops with DAs highlighted a
common thread: transport, communication resources, farm demonstration

84
materials, and adequate housing (in descending priority) are vital to DA
effectiveness. In one workshop, DAs were asked to evaluate the impact of an
FTC with three DAs versus an FTC with two DAs and adequate transport. The
unanimous opinion was that two DAs with transport were more capable to meet
farmer needs. After transport, DAs coincided that the lack of timely and relevant
information was also an impediment to their effectiveness.

Another approach to increase DA impact and system sustainability is through the

utilization of “farmer professors”. Described in detail in section four of this
report, farmer professors can act as an important extension resource, passing on
knowledge and learnings from their own experience and extension participation
to other farmers. This method has been employed effectively in other countries to
increase leverage of the extension system without incurring the additional cost of
increased number of extension agents.

A “farmer professor” program could be implemented in Ethiopia following

successful models demonstrated in India and China. Participating farmers should
be selected based on objective measurements, dependent on major cropping
system of the given woreda. It is important that individuals selected be
employing accepted best practices and are able to support the farmer-driven
extension curriculum in place within the community. Certification programs,
allowing farmers to be recognized for applying best practices, can be an effective
motivational tool and reward for participating farmers and ensures that the best
farmers participate in the program. Once implemented, the program will become
a complementary component to DAs’ efforts, strengthening extension outreach
and bringing real world experiences from the best farmers in the kebele.

FTCs can also generate revenue to improve farm level impact and sustainability
(Box 3). The experience of DAs in the Atsibi woreda is illustrative: access to
credit enabled investment in commercialized demonstrations and revenues for
the FTC to reinvest in diversification, new farm enterprises, and DA resources.
Farmers then replicated the entrepreneurial demonstrations, not only modeling
the DA’s on-farm practice, but also their marketing skills, agribusiness acumen,
and credit use. If FTCs are motivated to generate revenue with new enterprises,
these entrepreneurial demonstrations are a dual catalyst for: sustainable revenue
for FTCs and increased on-farm production. . The FTC Management Committee
should have authority to determine how the revenues from the demonstration
farms are spent, and to ensure that the DAs do not allow the revenue motive to
detract from focus on demonstration. There are legal precedents for how this
might interact with the national budgetary frameworks in Ethiopia’s school

85
system. Even with three DAs, revenue generation is a vital step. With the right
enablers in place, the trade-offs between revenue generation, DA staffing, and
infrastructure for effectiveness enhance sustainability.

Enabling systems are critical in order to capitalize on

these investment choices and trade-offs
The example in the Atsibi woreda illustrates a key set of characteristics for this
revenue-generating model to function at scale. First, two vital enablers are
needed: the availability of credit, and the right skill set and responsibilities for
DAs. Second, a set of supporting but not essential enablers enhances the
likelihood of success.

▪ Financial credit. A common thread among entrepreneurial DAs is access to

credit. In East Asian examples, particularly China, extension agents played a
key role in facilitating government-financed credit to small farmers. The
availability of this credit, along with subsidized inputs, remains a key
ingredient to China’s success. The Ethiopian extension model is uniquely
placed to move one step further. Whereas in China, extension agents
facilitated credit to farmers, in Ethiopia, the breadth of the physical
infrastructure with FTCs allows the extension system to experiment with
DAs as credit recipients themselves. The model allows for unique
entrepreneurial demonstrations at FTCs whereby revenue generation is also
a process of knowledge transfer to small farmers. DAs are both credit
practitioners and facilitators. Widely available credit, potentially revolving
funds backstopped by the public sector, or public-private partnerships with
credit providers in regions with limited access, are critical for FTC
sustainability.
▪ DA skill development. To begin to manage FTCs as market-oriented
demonstrations, DAs require additional skills. Sections 4 and 5 of this report
describe need for DA in-service training, and recommends that DA training
shift from specialized areas of crops, livestock, and NRM to more generalist
training with practical experience. In addition to these technical skill sets,
DAs will require entrepreneurial, agribusiness, marketing, and credit
training in the curriculum at the ATVET level, but more immediately,
through in-service training offered to existing DAs. Short trainings to hone
these skills can happen in two ways: through ATVETs and SMSs at the
woreda and regional-level, or through peer-to-peer methods that link
effective DAs to train peers in FTC business management. It should be

86
 noted that many SMSs would also benefit from greater skill development
(and this may be a prerequisite for an SMS to lead trainings at the woreda
level).
▪ DA on-site responsibilities. A senior DA could be primarily responsible for
the FTC business management and marketing components, and one or two
junior DAs could be responsible for the field extension and site visits. Given
the market-orientated aspects of the FTCs, one DA will likely need to have
primary responsibility for business management.
▪ Secondary factors. Improved inputs, markets, irrigation, and transportation
and improved input and output markets also create revenue opportunities for
entrepreneurial FTCs in the longer term. For output markets, relationships
between public extension for aggregation and quality, and buyers in high-
value crops, create opportunities. However, output markets are typically the
domain of producer groups and cooperatives, particularly in post-
production, where public extension will likely take a more facilitative role.

Woreda governments need the tools to decide between

FTC alternatives and trade-offs
At the woreda-level, the performance of revenue-generating FTCs requires
coordination, technical assistance, training, and evaluation. Particularly to
replicate the model, woreda-administration will need training and guidance on
how to implement these best practices. The administrative unit could also play a
role in facilitating credit by expanding GOE funds for loan guarantees to
backstop credit provision (only necessary in regions where credit is currently
unavailable to smallholder farmers). Core activities are described below.

▪ Set revenue goals and FTC-level budgets based on local context.

Regional differences between agricultural growth and food-insecure regions
will affect how resource allocations are made. In practice, the five FTC
levels outlined in section 4 remain applicable here. Typically, only Level 4-
5 FTCs will have the resources to begin revenue generation. That said,
MOARD can take key steps to expand access to the two key enablers for
this transformation: widespread access to credit and entrepreneurial skill
development. As FTCs begin make entrepreneurial investments, it’s
important that decision-making remains bottom-up, with FTCs developing
an investment plan based up on a set budget and woredas holding FTCs
accountable to anticipated results.

87
▪ Analyze and determine appropriate numbers of FTCs. GOE faces a
number of considerations in the expansion of the system itself from 8,500 to
15,000 FTCs in coming years. A decision-making framework, driven by
strong evidence, would enable GOE to balance the trade-offs between the
impact of more FTCs with the resource investment. The initial push for high
national coverage was measured against the objective of one FTC per
kebele. Given the high rates of coverage, emphasis can now be placed on
quality.

CONSIDERATIONS FOR LONGER-TERM SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY

Agricultural extension systems change over time. The heavy GOE investments
since 2003 are now at a stage where they will begin to show returns, and also are
at a level of maturity to analyze issues of coverage versus quality, the role of the
enabling environment, the ability for public extension to offset costs with
revenue, and partnership with other actors. In this context, the section examines
the possibilities in the long term for a less resource-intensive and more
sustainable extension system. Lessons from extension in other developing
contexts highlight three key factors that affect long-term sustainability: revenues
within the system, partnerships with other actors, and changes in the enabling
environment. At a systems level, these are three key levers GOE should consider
at their disposal.

88
 REVENUE AND CREDIT IN THE CHINESE EXPERIENCE
In China, for instance, the public extension system began to experiment with alternative models
of provision in the 1990s both to generate revenue for the public sector and to leverage a wide
range of providers. The public sector maintains control of extension services but allows for a
plurality of actors in defined areas, particularly in high-value specialized farming, and for
revenue generation. The shifts have led to a more sustainable model that primarily drives
revenues through public-sector input suppliers to farmers with readily accessible credit. The
right mix of revenue and credit, paired with tools like input subsidies, were drivers for China’s
transformation.

▪ Revenue generation: Commercialized agricultural services were introduced in China to

work in tandem with basic extension services in rural areas to facilitate input supply to
farmers, combined with one-on-one advisory services to each farmer about the
appropriate technologies for their specific farms. Sales on all inputs generated a 2% profit,
which, in turn, covered some staffing and operational costs for the field extension system.
The input supply, namely seeds, fertilizers, and pesticides are state owned enterprises. In
addition to commercializing public input suppliers, the Chinese system also issues tenders
for technical contracts on high-value farming to alternative providers, but aligns with public
priorities.

▪ Credit supply: Two key drivers for the expansion of small farmer production and
cultivated land in China were government subsidies available for farm inputs and credit
offerings from rural credit cooperatives. Cooperatives partner with public extension agents,
particularly the commercialized agricultural services, to facilitate credit lines to farmers.
The Chinese combined an input driven push of improved seed, fertilizers, and pesticides
to small producers with access to credit. The credit supply also enabled the expansion of
irrigated land with micro-irrigation technologies and mid-scale investment, in parallel with a
government strategy of large-scale water investment.

Agricultural extension adapts to external factors

As countries industrialize, the demand and supply of basic extension services
diversify. Yields increase and income-generating opportunities for smallholder
producers multiply. Enabling environments also change. Infrastructure and
transportation unveils domestic markets for rural producers. ICTs, from radios to
mobile phones, are penetrating markets in SSA at phenomenal rates; and in
agriculture, the application of these technologies introduces newfound tactics to
reach small producers with relevant and timely agriculture information.

Global shifts in demand also affect Ethiopian extension: the booming appetite in
the Middle East and Asia for Ethiopian livestock exports, both hides and meats,
affects how extension works with pastoralists and livestock farmers. In short,
enhanced market linkages now create a strain on Ethiopian extension to diversify
into high-value crops while simultaneously adapting the technology adoption
model to intensify production in staples. For Ethiopia, the market opportunities

89
pose a challenge for the extension system to balance the growth potential in
highland “breadbasket” regions with chronic food insecurity, predominantly in
low-potential agro-ecologies.

The availability of agricultural inputs has also been a historic driver for systems
change in extension. Affordable micro-irrigation technologies and mid-scale
irrigation investment multiply productivity. The provision of fertilizer and
improved seed through non-state actors, including producer groups and
cooperatives, NGOs, and the private sector, introduces profit incentives that
evoke a clear question: what are the parameters for profit incentives in the public
extension system?

Issues and options in the future

Ethiopia’s extension system is unique and continues to make great strides,
particularly with the productive potential of the country’s agricultural sector. The
degree of growth since 2002, both in personnel and in infrastructure, is
distinctive in comparison to any other extension system in the world. In the
context of sustainability, three core issues remain salient: models to generate
revenue, links to a robust enabling environment, and the role of non-public
actors. Lessons from other public extension systems show how the right mixture
of shifts in these areas can be catalytic to systems change. Given the reach of
Ethiopia’s field extension system, shifts in these areas will have wide and
significant impact on farm production, livelihoods, and growth.

Revenues within the system

China’s case with commercialized agricultural services illustrates a public sector-

led revenue model. Input distribution is a profitable source of sustainable
revenue. For Ethiopia, the agricultural unions play a key role in this distribution;
however, as seed supplies grow, GOE could consider alternative models for
public-sector input distribution. One option is for FTCs to link with input
suppliers, or be input suppliers themselves, at the field level. The approach is a
variation on China’s commercialized services and would, over time, add an input
function to FTC’s current role in demonstration and farmer learning – and, in
fact, it could be more catalytic because of the extensive field-level distribution
network of FTCs. As with any revenue model, incentives and rewards must be
appropriately designed to ensure that DAs continue to meet their primary goal of
serving smallholder farmers.

90
Public extension can also consider two separate revenue sources: DA fee-for-
service in high-value crops and livestock enterprises, or a fee-for-service model
in post-production activities. In both these areas, markets require specialized
skills that can pay economic dividends to service providers. Several approaches
exist, ranging from small commissions to the public system to direct payment for
service. Particularly when the public sector has a profit motive, incentives can be
considered for DAs to deliver quality services.

New actors and PPPs in post-production, high-value crops, credit, and inputs

The field extension system is already interacting with NGOs and the private
sector for input supply, output markets, and training. At some levels, the
interaction is informal and uncoordinated: NGOs may use FTCs for farmer
training on rain harvesting and micro-irrigation or a microcredit organization
may rely on an FTC to market loan offerings. The interaction is also formalized:
NGOs may coordinate with the regional BOARD to conduct a set of trainings on
beekeeping in certain woredas. For the private sector, DAs and SMSs engage,
albeit in a very limited fashion, with producer groups and input cooperatives on
an ad hoc basis to facilitate access to improved seed, credit offerings, and output
markets to buyers. Universities, research institutions, and producer groups also
play a role.

Post-production and high-value crops are areas where public systems historically
draw on expertise from non-public providers. The role of the private sector and
NGOs is emerging in both post-production and high-value crops, driven by profit
motives and the potential for livelihood gains for small farmers. With a careful
strategy, GOE could harness the role of these non-public providers in specific
areas. The Chinese model shows how competitive bids and tenders for these
services can hold non-pubic providers aligned with and accountable to the public
system. Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are also a technique to infuse new
capital in productive areas. Recent investment in Ethiopia’s livestock industry is
an apt example where enhanced scale is possible in post-production. FTCs and
DAs can potentially play a role in aggregating for procurement and quality
control at the field level. They can also facilitate PPPs on the ground in relevant
areas.

There is potential alignment for PPPs in credit provision. Existing government

funds already provide loan guarantees and backstop risk for cooperatives and
woreda-level resources. Given the high-impact potential for widespread and

91
consistent supplies of credit, there is potential to identify strategies for the public
sector to leverage other providers.

It is important to note that even in cases where some extension services begin to
fall to other actors, some services always remain in public extension. Ethiopia’s
system sees some evidence of this shift today, with some services being provided
by private sector actors (e.g., coffee). This should be viewed as a positive
development for the system. However, public extension will always be crucial
for farmers.

Changes in the enabling environment

As discussed at length in section 6, the enabling environment is a vital

component of the long-term choices. The shifts in South and East Asian
extension systems were sparked in large part by shifts in the enabling
environment paired with economic growth. Particularly with input supplies, the
shortage of improved seeds and the prohibitive costs of fertilizers for many small
farmers in parts of Ethiopia are consistent bottlenecks to productivity. Similarly,
the availability of credit is also an enabler that is lacking in many regions of the
country. Inputs and credit work in tandem, and jointly can have a transformative
effect on the agricultural sector when reinforced by a strong public extension
system.

CLOSING THOUGHTS ON SUSTAINABILITY

Considerations on sustainability and trade-offs remain central to the findings in
this report. The current growth of the system, while impressive in both scope and
impact, requires more reflection for a “best fit” solution for extension vis-à-vis
other enabling systems. In the near term, the scenario presented in Part I of this
chapter would address some immediate concerns about the current system’s
sustainability. If FTCs can be revenue-generating units at the field-level, Ethiopia
will have demonstrated an entirely new model for demonstration and knowledge
transfer.

Part II of this chapter emphasizes that GOE and the public extension system have
three important levers at their disposal for impact and sustainability: revenue
generation, non-public actors, and the enabling environment. Each of these
requires careful thought, foresight, and strategic planning; however, in different
combinations these factors have been key drivers for public extension to drive
agricultural transformation.

92
8. Recommendations and implementation

RECOMMENDATIONS
This report has described recommendations and potential change actions across
each level of analysis, illustrating potential avenues to improvement as they
relate to identified constraints. Taken as a whole, these recommendations
represent a cohesive set of actions that can be pursued to strengthen the
Ethiopian extension system. The broad set of recommendations covers seven
distinct themes, each impacting an important aspect of the extension system:

1) Strengthening farmer-driven orientation across all levels of extension,

focusing on farmer needs at woreda and kebele level

The overall management and orientation of the extension system must be driven
by farmer needs, from the types of services offered at the FTC to the overall
strategic direction set by regional and federal policy makers. A farmer-driven
orientation ensures that the extension system is serving farmers in their areas of
highest need and allows for the regional and woreda-level flexibility required in
an agricultural system as variable as Ethiopia.While a policy of decentralization
has been followed by the MOARD, the implementation has not yet been
consistent across all regions and more could be done to increase the voice of the
farmer in the system.

2) Broadening of extension services offered

This report has described in depth the great variation in services required by the
farmers, pastoralists, agro-pastoralists, women, and youth of Ethiopia. Extension
will need to broaden services to meet the subject-area needs for all these groups,
particularly as incomes continue to grow and farmers demand information on a
more diverse range of crop (including cash crop) and livestock subjects.

3) Resourcing FTCs for farmer impact and sustainability

The current resourcing levels of FTCs will need to be strengthened in order to

have farmer impact – both capital resources such as adequate buildings and
demonstration plots as well as the operating capacity of the FTC to provide
farmer demonstrations. Recommendations include an increased focus on
sustainability activities (e.g., increasing introduction of revenue-generating

93
demonstrations and potential for financially sound loans and micro-loans for
operational activities) at the FTC level.

4) Improving DA knowledge and capabilities

DAs represent the front line of Ethiopian extension, and as such their own
capabilities and knowledge to serve farmers is of the utmost importance.
Recommendations such as strengthening the DA education system and providing
in-service training courses on specific topics as demanded by farmers in each
Woreda will ensure that the system continues to serve farmers effectively;
farmer-to-farmer programs (e.g., farmer professors) should also be leveraged to
support and strengthen DA outreach and trainings.

5) Improving DA motivation and retention

Strong DA motivation to serve farmers is critical to the delivery of knowledge to

farmers, and field experiences show that the DA’s impact on the system
strengthens as tenure increases. Recommendations that improve the DA
experience (e.g., messaging and support from woreda and MOARD that focus on
important nature of DA services, development of a clear DA career path)
strengthen the overall implementation of extension services at farmer level.

6) Implementing performance culture and transparency at all levels of extension

Several recommendations identified as critical to increasing farmer impact (e.g.,

identifying metrics to track impact at FTC level) relate to the need for an overall
performance culture transformation in the system. An increased focus on
understanding the extension system’s impact and improvements in extension
reward systems can go a long way in pushing extension to be high-performing
and impact driven. The government’s recent effort to implement BPR has
brought a renewed sense of performance orientation to certain areas, but much
more can be done.

7) Improving linkages throughout the system

This report recognizes the importance of a system-wide approach to extension.

Recommendations focused on linkages between extension actors (e.g.,
strengthening ties between DA and SMS through WREC) to strengthen the
overall system approach and ensure that all actors are working together to reach
extension’s common goal. Specifically, the linkage between extension and
research needs to be improved so that farmers can receive critical information
and support in a timely manner and research efforts are tied to farmer needs. It is

94
also important to note strategic linkages with non-extension actors (NGOs,
private sector entities) that impact how farmers are served through the system.

Detailed actions that fall under each theme are illustrated below.

EXHIBIT 13. The recommendations are represented by 7 themes

Themes Activities
Strengthening farmer-driven orientation ▪ 1.1- Ensure farmer-driven alignment across all levels of
across all levels of extension extension policy
▪ 1.2- Strengthen farmer-led decision making at FTC
▪ 2.1- Increase/ expand focus on cash crops, other income-
Broadening of extension services focused products at farm level
offered ▪ 2.2- Increase focus on marginalized groups (e.g. women)

Resourcing FTCs for farmer impact and ▪ 3.1- Resource FTCs to basic functioning level
sustainability ▪ 3.2- Utilize credit to strengthen operations at FTC
▪ 3.3- Strategically invest in add-on resources, innovations
▪ 4.1- Offer in-service training for DA skill building
Strengthening DA knowledge and ▪ 4.2- Re-structure and strengthen ATVET system, curriculum
capabilities ▪ 4.3- Revise/ strengthen DA apprenticeship/ practical program

Improving DA motivation and retention ▪ 5.1- Implement DA, SMS career path
▪ 5.2- Revise/ tailor DA staffing for placement, timing in FTC
▪ 5.3- Incorporate big picture thinking into extension system
Implementing performance culture and ▪ 6.1- Launch performance mgmt program across all extension
transparency across system levels with target setting and tracking programs
▪ 6.2-Develop reward system for DA, SMS, FTC, decided based
on performance metrics and farmer input/ feedback
▪ 7.1- Develop Woreda Resource Centers to provide adequate
Improving linkages throughout the linkage and information opportunities for DAs and SMS
extension system ▪ 7.2- Foster improved linkages between research, ATVETs, on-
the-ground extension through site visits, farmer meetings, etc

IMPLEMENTATION ROADMAP FOR ETHIOPIAN

EXTENSION TRANSFORMATION
In pursuing this set of recommendations, the GOE and the broad range of actors
involved in Ethiopian extension (e.g., NGOs, donors, private-sector players)
should take specific action along three horizons. These three horizons encompass
a set of recommendations based on prioritization, timing needs, and
dependencies within the system.

95
EXHIBIT 14. The recommendations have been prioritized across
three implementation horizons

Horizon 3 – Next-phase activities

that will increase system
Horizon 2 – Actions that elevate effectiveness and sustainability
the system to higher performance
Horizon 1 – Must-dos to set up level
system for success and create
basic effectiveness

Highest
▪ 1.1, 5.3 Refine vision and ▪ 4.2 Restructure ATVET ▪ 3.3 Scale up innovation
mission for extension education system experiments to all FTCs
priority
▪ 1.2 Establish farmer-led decision ▪ 5.1 Develop DA/SMS career ▪ 3.3 Invest strategic resources to
making at FTC path lower cost of extension
▪ 2.1, 2.2, 4.1 Expand DA skill set ▪ 5.2 Revise DA staffing ▪ 6.1 Launch team to develop
for market-driven activities practices performance management system
▪ 3.1 Ensure FTC upgrade
resources are slated in
upcoming donor programs
▪ 3.2 Encourage FTC revenue
generation through loan program

Lower
▪ N/A ▪ 4.2, 5.3 Create extension ▪ 6.2 Develop performance rewards
awareness campaign for Das and SMS
priority
▪ 4.3 Strengthen practical ▪ 7.2 Foster greater linkages
portion of DA training
▪ 7.1 Develop Woreda Resource
Centres to build linkages

Innovative experiments should be launched across horizons and content areas to test implementation
Innovations
strategies and discover best fit solutions

Horizon 1: Immediate actions that create basic

effectiveness in the short term
Horizon 1 activities are “must-do” initiatives that spur basic extension system
effectiveness in the short term – in essence those actions and recommendations
that are of the highest priority and can have the highest impact on Ethiopian
extension in the near term. Some of these activities require action from the GOE
and MOARD; others will have a partnership focus with donor organizations that
are active in agriculture. Two programs in particular, the World Bank’s AGP and
the Food Security Program, could potentially be partners in some of the baseline
resourcing that needs to take place to strengthen the extension system. There are
five specific Horizon 1 activities that should be pursued, in order, to maximize
effectiveness:

▪ Refine clear vision and mission for Ethiopian extension.

We recommend that the GOE develop a clear and meaningful vision for
what extension should accomplish in Ethiopia, defining whom extension
seeks to serve and the specific objectives it hopes to achieve. This clear

96
 articulation of objectives and priorities, currently lacking in the system, will
align all involved parties and provide a guide on which to build a broad
campaign for strengthening and improving the extension system. The
government should publicize the effort to gain traction and momentum for
the broader set of recommendations ensuring that regions, zones, woredas,
and FTCs are all on point for the broader Ethiopian extension
transformation. This activity will directly impact awareness of all seven
recommendation themes, and should be led primarily by the Federal
government with support from MOARD. This activity is relatively low-
resource.
▪ Strengthen farmer-led decision-making at FTC level.
We recommend that the MOARD take the immediate step to establish
and/or strengthen farmer committees at the FTC level, involving broad set
of farmer stakeholders (including women, pastoralists, etc.) in the general
operating decisions of the FTC. This important first step will help drive the
shift towards a farmer-driven extension policy. This activity will have direct
impact on recommendation theme 1, and should be led primarily by the
MOARD. This activity will be relatively low-resource dependent mainly on
initial direction by the MOARD and implementation and support from
woredas and kebeles.
▪ Start to expand DA skill set for broadening extension offering.
We recommend that the MOARD launch a set of in-service trainings for
DAs, SMS, and other frontline extension personnel, focused on broadening
extension services, soft skills, and entrepreneurial skills. This skill
expansion is critical in moving to a more farmer-driven system (DAs need
expertise to serve farmers in their requested areas), and will ensure that
farmer-led decision making at the FTC level is met by impactful trainings
and demonstrations. This activity will impact recommendation themes 2, 4,
and 5, and should be led primarily by MOARD. Regions, woredas, and
kebeles will be critical implementation partners as the program gets up and
running. This activity will have moderate resource requirement, and can
potentially be supported with partnership from ATVETs, donors, and
woreda-level government.
▪ Ensure extension resources in upcoming donor programs to bring FTCs
to operational level.
We recommend that the MOARD, in conjunction with multiple donor
programs including the upcoming AGP and HABP, ensure basic resourcing

97
 investments to bring FTCs to operational level. Basic resourcing of FTCs is
required to give extension the opportunity to service farmers in a
meaningful way – farmer-driven, educated extension personnel will still
have minimal impact without the capacity to host impactful trainings,
demonstration plots, etc. This activity will impact recommendation themes 3
and 5, and should be led primarily by MOARD, with significant resource
commitments and activity from the donor and NGO community.
▪ Encourage FTC revenue generation and financing for operational
activities.
We recommend that the MOARD encourage and stimulate entrepreneurial
activity and revenue generation at the FTC level, incorporating farmer- and
market-driven crop demonstrations with the proposed goal of self-sustaining
FTCs. These activities should include specific programs created to offer
small loans to functioning FTCs as operating seed for selected investments.
This financing will allow FTCs the opportunity to test new revenue-
generating ideas and will help to broaden focus of extension through new
experiences at the FTC. These activities should be led by the MOARD, with
support from the donor community for loan guarantees, ensuring that the
program has incentive to support FTCs through operational loans that
should be paid back. These activities will support recommendation themes
2, 3, 4, and 5, and will have a moderate resource requirement to cover the
entire FTC system with operational loans.

Horizon 2: Actions that elevate the extension system to a

higher performance level
Horizon 2 activities push the extension system to a higher level of efficacy,
building on the basic functionality that is achieved through Horizon 1 activities.
These activities are not as urgent or immediately impactful as those activities in
Horizon 1, but they will still need to be implemented to have a fully functioning
extension system and should be pursued as soon as possible in order to get the
full impact of extension. Activities include the following.

Highest priority

▪ Launch a project to experiment in selected FTCs and generate success

cases.
We recommend that the extension system experiment with new approaches
and technologies in select FTCs to inform the overall system on best-fit

98
 practices and to generate success cases on which to base the overall system
transformation. These experiments, generating insights in recommendation
themes 1, 3, 5, and 7, can be donor-led with direct partnership with local
execution partners, and likely demand a moderate level of resources.
▪ Implement revised DA hiring and staffing practices focused on home
woreda.
We recommend that the extension system begin staffing DAs in home
woredas and home regions and end the process of shifting DAs to different
areas after limited periods of time in field (under one year). Altering these
practices will have great impact both on extension efficacy (e.g., DAs will
be more familiar with home woreda crop systems) as well as DA motivation
and retention, as DAs find greater job satisfaction. These practices, likely
implementable by MOARD-wide policy shift, will require very limited
resources.
▪ Review and enhance DA and SMS career paths.
We recommend that MOARD develop and implement DA and SMS career
paths, increasing role clarity and motivation of extension personnel as well
as providing suitable framework for performance management techniques.
These activities will impact recommendation themes 4, 5, and 6 and should
be led by the MOARD. Limited resources will be required.
Lower priority

▪ Restructure extension agent education system.

We recommend that the current DA/SMS education system, including the
ATVETs, be restructured and repurposed to meet the new needs of the
extension system. As described in detail in this report, these activities
include restructuring the curriculum and practical components and shifting
emphasis to a broader set of extension topics (e.g., horticulture). This team
will likely be jointly sponsored by MOARD and the ATVETs, and will
directly impact recommendation themes 2, 4, and 7. These activities will
demand a moderate level of resources but will have significant impact in
training new and returning DAs (in-service training) in new farmer-driven
approaches and content areas.
▪ Develop woreda Resource Centers to serve as learning/ linkage point
between DAs and SMS.
We recommend woredas develop woreda Resource Centers, offering a place
for DAs to come to obtain information from SMS, and host trainings. These

99
 centers would support greater service to farmers, as DAs would have greater
opportunity to connect with SMSs, research, and the broader extension
community. Depending on approach, costs could be limited, as woredas
leverage buildings and infrastructure already in place at woreda. Some
moderate investments in technology and training materials would be
required.
▪ Strengthen the practical portion of DA training in the field.
We recommend that ATVETs and woredas work together to strengthen the
practical internships undertaken by DAs in the final 9 months of their
training. Currently, most internships are ad hoc and poorly managed, with
little supervision. Adding structure and clarity around DA intern role and
requiring time spent on the farm site in productive activity (shadowing
either DAs or model farmers) would have positive impact on DA
preparation and would also help develop greater soft skills the DA could
bring into his new role. Led in partnership between ATVETs and woredas,
this activity would be relatively low cost.
▪ Create an awareness campaign for extension program.
We recommend that MOARD launch a marketing campaign designed to
increase awareness and prestige of DA program, helping to increase DA
motivation and retention as well as farmer participation. Overall messaging
should be relevant to extension system as a whole, with focus on DAs as
knowledgeable workers in place to help Ethiopian development. Limited
resources will be required.

Horizon 3: Next phase of activities that will increase

effectiveness and sustainability in system
Horizon 3 activities strengthen the effectiveness and sustainability of the
Ethiopian extension system as it grows and develops into a world-class system.
These activities should likely be pursued after the extension system has been
made operational and is broadly functional, as these activities will have a
multiplying effect on activities that have already been implemented.

Highest priority

▪ Leverage learnings from innovation experiments and scale up to all

FTCs.
We recommend that the MOARD and regional governments work together
to take success cases from innovation experiments and initial innovative

100
 FTCs and link these cases to other DAs and FTCs; MOARD should
encourage farmer visits and DA visits to innovative regions to spread best-
fit practices and successful models that have been created, showing the
roadmap to sustainability and revenue generation for a broader set of FTCs.
These scale-ups will potential be quite resource-intensive and may be an
opportunity to leverage donor relationships for capital investments.
▪ Develop performance measurement and evaluation scheme.
We recommend that MOARD develop a system-wide performance
management system, focused on farmer impact and driven primarily by
farmer review. The system could work hand-in-hand with farmer
organizations, rating DAs, SMS, etc. on impact measures. This system will
ensure that key outcomes in extension are achieved and incentivized
appropriately. These activities directly relate to recommendation theme 6,
and should be led by MOARD. Limited resources will be required.
▪ Invest in strategic set of resources to lower cost and increase extension
efficacy.
We recommend that the MOARD analyze and invest in strategic resources
that can increase the impact of extension in a cost-effective way. Such
resources could include motorbikes in specific regions, increasing range of
impact DAs can have (and potentially scaling back to one to two DAs per
FTC in this region due to distance between farm, etc.). These resources
should be carefully considered from a cost-benefit perspective, and should
be region/woreda-specific due to dramatic differences in circumstances
from FTC to FTC.
Lower priority

▪ Foster greater linkages between research, ATVETs, and extension,

directly related to new extension models and approaches.
We recommend that MOARD, working in partnership with research and
ATVETs, support increased extension linkages, mandating farmer
participation and FTC visits by key research and ATVET personnel. As
extension shifts to a broader set of farming systems, research and ATVETs
will require greater focus and ties to farm-level innovations. Enabling these
linkages will likely have limited resource requirements.
▪ Develop performance incentives for DAs and SMSs to encourage
performance.
We recommend developing a set of system-wide performance incentives to

101
 encourage high performance from DAs, SMS, and FTCs. Linked to an
impartial, transparent performance measurement system, these incentives,
both monetary and nonmonetary, should be rolled out across regions and
celebrate farmer impact on extension. Incentives should be tied to important
principles of farmer-driven, market-oriented extension, and should be
reviewed and voted on by farmers. Additional resourcing investments, loan
prioritization, etc. could potentially be linked to highest-performing groups
as well. These incentives would likely have low resource requirements.

THE WAY FORWARD

Implementation of the full set of recommendations will take time and will require
coordination among a range of actors, including public and private entities,
donors, and NGOs. While many of the recommendations and activities described
above require appropriate timing and partnership to be implemented, there is a
set of actions that the Ministry of Agriculture can take on, of its own volition, to
prepare for success as more extensive pieces of this extension transformation are
put into place. For reference we have prepared a checklist of important enabling
actions that should be implemented as soon as possible by the MOARD. These
actions are low-cost, high-impact ways for the extension system transformation
to gain traction and will illustrate to the broader community that the MOARD is
serious and committed to action on extension efficacy.

102
EXHIBIT 15. MOARD near-term extension activities checklist

… Prepare FTC investment guide, including key resources needed for

baseline level, in preparation for donor conversations
… Complete country-wide FTC assessment, determining current level of
infrastructure at all built FTCs (simple survey to woreda heads on
infrastructure in place, or more extensive study)
… Adjust regional policy of DA placement, shifting to staffing in home
woredas and ending practice of shifting DAs to new woredas after 9-12
months
… Direct woredas to implement peer learning programs amongst DAs,
including feedback mechanisms and common meetings (potentially
meeting quarterly at woreda office); potential for programs to be SMS-
led and include half-day training on specific subjects by SMS
… Issue communiqué to woredas on DA training/apprenticeship, shifting to
farm-based, supervised internship models for new DAs (e.g., mandating
time with model farmers, time shadowing DAs, some supervision)
… Brief regional extension leaders on farmer-driven approaches, enabling
regions and woredas to implement proposed decentralized environment
and giving flexibility to DAs and SMS to meet farmer needs and
requests
… Identify gaps in extension packages for women, pastoralists, agro-
pastoralists, and direct research and relevant extension partners to
begin development of relevant new materials for these groups

CLOSING THOUGHTS ON EXTENSION RECOMMENDATIONS

Drawing on the full range of report findings and strengthened by extensive
stakeholder engagement, this set of recommendations and implementation plan
can be viewed as a road map for strengthening and improving the Ethiopian
extension system. To be successful, a range of actors including the GOE, the
MOA, the donor and NGO community, and the private sector will need to work
together to implement the various components and programs. Ultimately, the
transformational change required for greater extension impact will need to come
from the Ethiopian people – from farmers and DAs at the front line of extension
to the highest policy makers.

The review team recognizes and commends the Ethiopian government for its
commitment to improving the agricultural sector and alleviating rural poverty. It
is clear that there are significant opportunities for change, and that there is a
strong base on which these improvements can be built.

103
Much work has been accomplished with regard to extension in Ethiopia.
However, much more remains to be done. We are therefore excited about the
potential impact that further strengthening the extension system will have on the
men and women farmers across Ethiopia; impact that both helps to maintain
national food security while at the same time increases farm income to improve
rural livelihoods.

104
1
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, personal communication with State Minister, 2009.
2
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, personal communication with State Minister, 2009.
3
IRIN Humanitarian News and Analysis, UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs,
http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=80908, 14 October 2008.
4
IRIN Humanitarian News and Analysis, UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs,
http://www.irinnews.org/Report.aspx?ReportId=85021, 26 June, 2009.
5
Source: Authors.
6
For example, in one district (woreda) in India, in just 3+ years, a market-driven extension system
introduced over 30 different high-value crops, livestock and other enterprises that resulted in over 750
producer groups being organized and linked to markets. For more information on creating a more market-
driven extension system, see Singh, et al, 2006, Swanson, 2006, and Swanson 2007.

105
Appendix

.
REFERENCES AND OTHER RESOURCES
Abate, H. 2007. Review of Extension Systems Applied in Ethiopia with Special
emphasis to the Participatory Demonstration and Training Extension
System. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Abegaze, S., A. Tola, and S. Demeke. 2004. The balance between middle and
high level human resource training in the agricultural sector of Ethiopia.
In Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conference of the Ethiopian Society of
Animal Production (ESAP), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, August.

Aberra, A. and Teshome, A. 2009. The Agricultural/Pastoral Extension System

in Ethiopia: Opportunities, Challenges and Future Prospects. Draft Report
of a Panel Discussion, March 09, Addis Ababa.

Anderson, J.R. and G. Feder 2002. Rural Extension Services, World Bank,
Agriculture and Rural Development Department, Washington DC.

Anderson, J.R., G. Feder, and S. Ganguly. 2006. The Rise and Fall of Training
and Visit Extension: An Asian Mini-Drama with an African Epilogue.
World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3928. Washington, DC: The
World Bank.

Ashworth, V. 2005. The Challenges of Change for Agricultural Extension in

Ethiopia. A Discussion Paper. Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia.
Addis Ababa.

Befekadu, D. and N. Berhanu (Eds.), 1999/2000. Annual Report on the

Ethiopian Economy, Vol I, Addis Ababa: The Ethiopian Economic
Association.

Belay, K and Degnet Abebaw, 2004. Challenges Facing Agricultural Extension

Agents: A Case Study from South-western Ethiopia. African
Development Bank.

Bekele, E., Ponniah, A., and Kisamba-Mugerwa, W. 2006. Review of

Agricultural Extension Impacts in Ethiopia. Prepared for the World Bank
Office, Addis Ababa.

Beintema, N. and M. Solomon. 2003. Ethiopia. ASTI Country Brief No. 9.

Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.

.
Berdegué, J.A., and C. Marchant. 2001. Chile’s Agricultural Advisory Service
for Small Farmers: 1978 – 2000. Santiago, Chile: Centro Latino-
Americano para el Desarrollo Rural.

Bernard, T., Gabre-Madhin, E. and Taffesse, A.S. 2007. Smallholders’

Commercialization through Cooperatives. A Diagnostic for Ethiopia.
IFPRI Discussion Paper 00722. Washington, D.C: International Food
Policy Research Institute.
Beyene, Y., A. Gaumnitz, C. Goike, and T. Robbins. 2005. Stimulating
community participation in primary schools: Perspectives on the BESO II
Project in Bahir Dar, Ethiopia. Unpublished manuscript, George
Washington University, Washington, D.C.
Birner, R., K. Davis, J. Pender, E. Nkonya, P. Anandajayasekeram, J. Ekboir, A.
Mbabu, D. Spielman, D. Horna, S. Benin, and M. Cohen. 2006. From
“Best Practice” to “Best Fit:” A Framework for Designing and
Analyzing Pluralistic Agricultural Advisory Services. International Food
Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, DC.
Bonger, T., Ayele, G., and Kuma, T. 2004. Agricultural Extension, Adoption
and Diffusion in Ethiopia. EDRI – research report I, Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia.

Buchy, M. and Basaznew, F. 2005. Gender-blind Organizations Deliver Gender-

biased Services: The Case of Awasa Bureau of Agriculture in Southern
Ethiopia. Gender, Technology and Development. SAGA Publications.

Byerlee, D., D. J. Spielman, D. Alemu, and M. Gautam. 2007. Policies to

Promote Cereal Intensification in Ethiopia: A Review of Evidence and
Experience. IFPRI Discussion Paper No. 707. Washington, DC:
International Food Policy Research Institute.

Carlsson, F., Kohlin, G., Mekonnen, A. and Yesuf, M. 2005. Are Agricultural
Extension Packaged what Ethiopian Farmers Want? A Stated Preference
Analysis. Working Papers in Economics no. 172. Department of
Economics, Goteborg University.

Davis, K. 2008. Extension in Sub-Saharan Africa: Overview and Assessment of

Past and Current Models and Future Prospects. Journal of International
Agricultural and Extension Education 15(3): 15—28.

Davis, K., E. Nkonya, D. Ayalew, and E. Kato. 2009. Assessing the impact of
farmer field schools in East Africa. Paper presented at the 25th Annual
Conference of the Association for International Agricultural and
Extension Education (AIAEE) “25 Years of Strengthening International

.
 Agricultural & Extension Education” San Juan, Puerto Rico, 24 – 28 May
2009.

Davis, K, Ekboir, J. M., Mekasha, W., Ochieng, C. Spielman, D. J., and Zerfu,
E. 2007. Strengthening agricultural education and training in Sub-
Saharan Africa from an innovation systems perspective: Case studies of
Ethiopia and Mozambique. IFPRI Discussion Paper 00736. Washington,
DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.

Davis, K., J. Ekboir, and D. J. Spielman. 2008. Strengthening agricultural

education and training in Sub-Saharan Africa from an innovation systems
perspective: A Case Study of Mozambique. Journal of Agricultural
Education and Extension 14(1): 35-51.

Dercon, S., Gilligan, D. O., Hoddinott, J. and Woldehanna, T. 2008. The Impact
of Roads and Agricultural Extension on Consumption Growth and
Poverty in Fifteen Ethiopian Villages. Washington, D.C: IFPRI
Discussion Paper 00840. International Food Policy Research Institute.

Diao, X.; Fekadu, B.; Haggblade, S.; Seyoum Taffesse, A.; Wamisho, K.; Yu,
B.. 2007. Agricultural growth linkages in Ethiopia : Estimates using fixed
and flexible price models. IFPRI Discussion Paper 695. Washington DC:
International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). 43 pages.

Diaz, J., J. F. Le Coq, M. R. Mercoiret, and D. Pesche. 2004. Building the

Capacity of Rural Producer Organizations. Lessons of the World Bank
Experience. World Bank, Washington, DC.

Druschel, Kate. 2005. The Ultimate Balancing Act: Investor Confidence and
Regulatory Considerations for MicroFinance. Microreport #28.
Washington, D.C.: USAID.

Efa, N., Gorman, M., and Phelan, J. 2005. Implications of an Extension Package
Approach for Farmers’ Indigenous Knowledge: The Maize Extension
Package in South-western Ethiopia. Journal of International Agricultural
and Extension Education. 12 (3) pp. 67-78.

Eicher, Carl K., Helder Gemo, and Solomon Teclemariam, eds. 2005.
Mozambique’s Experience in Building a National Extension System. East
Lansing: Michigan State University.

Ethiopian Economic Association/Ethiopian Economic Policy Research Institute.

2006. Evaluation of the Ethiopian Agricultural Extension with Particular

.
 Emphasis on the Participatory Demonstration and Training Extension
System (PADETES). Addis Ababa.

FAO. 2008a. Key messages from a Study on Ethiopia’s Extension Systems.

Based on the Work of Habtemariam Abate. Document ET-TRS-
08/ext/02. Project: TCPF/ETH/3101. Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United Nations Sub Regional Office for Eastern Africa and FAO
Representation in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa.

FAO. 2008b. Lessons of the Asian Green Revolution for Ethiopia’s Agricultural
Extension and 15 Key Messages on Extension in Ethiopia. PowerPoint
Highlights. Document ET-TRS-08/ext/06. Project: TCPF/ETH/3101.
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Sub Regional
Office for Eastern Africa and FAO Representation in Ethiopia. Addis
Ababa.

Ferguson, A., and Romboli, S. 2004. Environmental and Social Management

Framework. E889. Rural Capacity Building Project. The Federal
Democratic Republic of Ethiopia.

Farrington, J. 1997. The Role of Non-Governmental Organizations in Extension.

In Improving Agricultural Extension: A Reference Manual. Eds. B. E.
Swanson, R. P. Bentz, and A. J. Sofranko. Rome: Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations.

Gebre-ab, N. 2006. Commercialization of Smallholder Agriculture in Ethiopia.

EDRI Notes and Paper Series No.3. Ethiopian Development Research
Institute. Addis Ababa

Gebremedhin, B., Hoekstra, D., and Tegegne, A. 2006. Commercialization of

Ethiopian Agriculture: Extension Service from Input Supplier to
Knowledge Broker and Facilitator. IPMS Working Paper No. 1.
Improving Productivity and Market Success of Ethiopian Farmers project,
International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI). Nairobi, Kenya.

Gemo, H., and W. M. Rivera. 2001. Mozambique’s Move towards a Pluralistic

National System of Rural Extension. Agricultural Research & Extension
Network Paper No. 110. London: Overseas Development Institute.

Gilligan, D., J. Hoddinot, and A. S. Taffesse. 2008. The Impact of Ethiopia’s

Safety Net Programme and its Linkages. IFPRI Discussion Paper No.

.
 00839. Washington, DC: The International Food Policy Research
Institute.

Government of Ethiopia. 2001. Rural Development Policies, Strategies and

Instruments. Addis Ababa: The Government of the Federal Democratic
Republic of Ethiopia.

Government of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, 2005. Support to

NEPAD-CAADP Implementation. Volume III of VI Bankable Investment
Project Profile. Human Resource Development for Agricultural Extension
Service. NEPAD & FAO.

Grey, David and Claudia Sadoff. 2006. Managing Water Resources to Maximize
Sustainable Growth: A World Bank Water Resources Assistance Strategy
for Ethiopia. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

ILRI and MOARD. 2005. Improving Productivity and Market Success of

Ethiopian Farmers. Project Implementation Report. Addis Ababa,
Ethiopia: International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI ) and the
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MOARD).

Kassa, B. 2002. Constraints to Agricultural Extension Work in Ethiopia: The

Insiders’ View. S. Afr. J. Agric. Ext./S. Afr. Tydskr. Landbouvoorl., (31),
pp. 63-79.

Kassa, B. 2003. Agricultural Extension in Ethiopia: The Case of Participatory

Demonstration and Training Extension System. Journal of Social
Development in Africa. 18 (1) pp. 49-84

Kassa, B. 2004a. Postgraduate training in agricultural sciences in Ethiopia.

Higher Education Policy 17: 49–70.

Kassa, B. 2004b. Linkages of higher education with agricultural research,

extension and development. Unpublished manuscript, Alemaya
University, Alemaya, Ethiopia.

Kassa, H. 2005. Historical Development and Current Challenges of Agricultural

Extension with Particular Emphasis on Ethiopia. Ethiopian Economic
Association (EEA)/Ethiopian Economic Policy Research Institute
(EEPRI) Working Paper No. 2/05. Addis Ababa: EEA/EEPRI.

.
Kassa, B., and Abebaw, D. 2004. Challenges Facing Agricultural Extension
Agents: A Case Study from South-western Ethiopia. African
Development Bank. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Kelemework, F. W. 2007. Realizing the Dream: Agricultural Extension for Rural

Livelihoods Development in Ethiopia. Institute of Social Sciences
Graduate School of Development Studies MA Thesis.

Kelemework F. and H. Kassa 2006. Assessment of the Current Extension

System of Ethiopia: A Closer Look at Planning and Implementation,
Issue paper 2/2006. Ethiopian Economic Association/ Ethiopian
Economic Policy Research Institute (EEA/EEPRI). Addis Ababa.

Kreuchauf , H. P. 2008. Further Development of the Agricultural Technical and

Vocational Education and Training (ATVET) Sub- System and ATVET
Colleges in Ethiopia: Final Report. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: Rural
Capacity Building Project.

Lemma, M., and V. Hoffmann. 2006. Taking a Systems Approach to

Agricultural Education, Research and Extension: Analysis of Extension
and the Practical Attachment Program of Mekelle University, Ethiopia.
Paper presented at the Conference on International Agricultural Research
for Development, Bonn, October 11–13.

Lindley, W.I. 2000. ‘Constraints and Potentials of Training Mid-Career

Extension Professionals in Africa’, in S.A. Breth (ed.), Innovative
Extension Education in Africa, Sasakawa African Association, Mexico
City, pp. 16–32.

Li, Xueqi. 2008. Study on Identification and Characterization of Promising

Chinese Best Agricultural Extension Practices for Adaptation to Ethiopia.
Paper prepared for the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) of the
United Nations, Rome.

Meera, S.N., Jhamtani, A. & Rao, D. U. M. 2004. Information and

Communications Technology in Agricultural Development: A
Comparative Analysis of Three Projects from India. Agricultural
Research and Extension Network Paper No. 135. London: Overseas
Development Institute.

.
Mishra, S. and B.E. Swanson. 2009. Extension’s Role in Organizing Producer
Groups: a Case Study from Orissa, India. Proceedings of the 25th Annual
AIAEE Conference, San Juan, Puerto Rico.

MOARD. 2005. Agricultural Technical Vocational Education and Training

Program Course Catalog. Addis Ababa: Agriculture Extension
Department.

MOFED (Ministry of Finance and Economic Development), Federal Democratic

Republic of Ethiopia. 2002. Ethiopia: Sustainable Development and
Poverty Reduction Program. Addis Ababa: MOFED.

MOFED 2005. Ethiopia: Building on Progress: A Plan for Accelerated and

Sustained Development to End Poverty. Addis Ababa: MOFED.

Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MOARD). 2009a. DAs & FTC
Data at National Level. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: MOARD.

Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MOARD), Department of

Agricultural Technical and Vocational Training and Education. 2009b.
Data on ATVET Colleges Graduates. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: MOARD.

Nie C., B.E. Swanson and Y. Feng. 2002. Financing of Extension: Lessons from
China. Extension and Rural Development Workshop. Washington, DC:
The World Bank.

Rivera, W.M., W. Zijp, and G. Alex. 2000. Contracting for Extension: Review of
Emerging Practices. AKIS Good Practice Note. Washington, DC: The
World Bank.

Rogers, E. M. 2003. Diffusion of Innovations, 5th Ed. New York: Free Press.

Roseboom, J., M. McMahon, I. Ekanayake, and I. John-Abraham. 2006.

Institutional Reform of Agricultural Research and Extension in Latin
America and the Caribbean. En Breve, Analytical Note Series No. 90,
World Bank Latin America and Caribbean Region, Washington, DC,
May.

Rudgard, S., .S. Katz, and A. Mangstl. No date. Recent Developments in

Information and Communications Technology: Implications for
Agricultural, Forestry and Fisheries R&D in Developing Countries.
Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).

.
Senadeera, P. 2007. Linking Rural Fruit and Vegetable Farmers to Global
Markets. Presentation at the 3rd International Conference on Linking
Farmers to Markets, New Delhi, March 12.

Shekara, P.C., ed. 2001. Private Extension: Indian Experiences. Hyderabad,

India: National Institute of Agricultural Extension Management.

Singh, J.P., Swanson, B.E. and Singh, K.M. 2006. Developing a Decentralized,
Market-driven Extension System in India: The ATMA Model in A.W.
Van den Ban and R.K. Samanta, Changing Roles of Agricultural
Extension in Asian Nations. Delhi: B.R. Publishing, p. 203-223.

Spielman, D. J., K. E. Davis, M. Negash, and G. Ayele. 2008. Rural Innovation

Systems and Networks: Findings from a Study of Ethiopian Smallholders.
IFPRI Discussion Paper No. 00759. Washington, DC: International Food
Policy Research Institute.

Spielman, D., J. Ekboir, K. Davis, C. O. Ochieng. 2008a. An innovation systems

perspective on strengthening agricultural education and training in sub-
Saharan Africa. Agricultural Systems 98: 1-9.

Spielman, D. J. and D. Kelemework. 2008. Mobilizing Rural Institutions for

Sustainable Livelihoods and Equitable Development: A Case Study of
Irrigation, Water Management and Smallholder Cooperatives in
Ethiopia. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute.

Spielman, Davis, Negash, Ayele. 2008. Rural Innovation Systems and Networks:
Findings from a Study of Ethiopian Smallholders. IFPRI Discussion
Paper 00759. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research
Institute.

Spielman, D. J., D. Kelemework, and D. Alemu. 2009. Policies to Promote

Smallholder Intensification in Ethiopia: The Search for Appropriate
Public and Private Roles. Paper presented at the Seventh International
Conference on the Ethiopian Economy, Addis Ababa, June 25 – 27.

Spielman, D. J., M. Negash, K. Davis, and G. Ayele. 2007. Agricultural

innovation in Ethiopia: A systems overview of opportunities and
constraints. In E. Wale, S. Regassa, D. Gebre-Michael, and B. Emana,
Reversing rural poverty in Ethiopia: Dilemmas and critical issues.
Proceedings of the 9th annual conference of the Agricultural Economics
Society of Ethiopia, pp. 193-213.

.
Spielman, D.J., M. Negash, K. Davis, and G. Ayele. 2006. The Smallholder
Farmer in a Changing World: The Role of Research, Extension and
Education in Ethiopian Agriculture. Ethiopian Strategy Support Program
(ESSP) Policy Conference Brief No. 12. Addis Ababa: IFPRI-EDRI.

Swanson, B.E. and M.M. Samy. 2002. Decentralization of Agricultural

Extension Systems: Key Elements for Success. Paper presented at the
Workshop on Extension and Rural Development. Washington, DC: The
World Bank.

Swanson, B.E. 2004. Extension Strategies for Poverty Alleviation in a Global

Economy. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Agricultural
Education and Environment, Suwon, Korea.

Swanson, B.E. 2006. The Changing Role of Agricultural Extension in a Global

Economy. Seminal Paper in Journal of International Agricultural and
Extension Education 13 (3): 5-18. .

Swanson, B.E. 2006. Extension Strategies for Poverty Alleviation: Lessons from
China and India. Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension.

Swanson, B.E. 2007. Developing a Market-Driven Extension System to Increase

Farm Income and Employment—Lessons Learned from China, India,
Egypt and the United States. In Proceedings of the 18th European Seminar
on Extension Education, Prague, Czech Republic.

Swanson, B.E. 2008a. Global Review of Good Agricultural Extension/Advisory

Service Practices. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of
the United Nations.

Swanson, B.E. 2008b. Changing Paradigms in Agricultural Extension. Lead

paper, International Seminar on Strategies for Improving Livelihood
Security of Rural Poor, Goa, India, 24-27 September 2008.

Swanson, B.E. 2008c. Redefining Agricultural Extension’s Role in Achieving

Sustainable Rural Development. International Journal of Extension
Education, September 2008.

Swanson, B.E. 2009 (forthcoming). Strengthening Agricultural Extension and

Advisory Systems: Procedures for Assessing, Transforming and
Evaluating Extension Systems. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

.
Tesfaye, T. 2008. Assessment of the Potential Roles and Contributions of
Alternative Extension Service Providers in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa:
Sasakawa Africa Association.

Torkelsson, A. 2007. Resources, Not Capital: A Case Study of the Gendered

Distribution and Productivity of Social Network Ties in Rural Ethiopia.
Rural Sociology 72(4): 583-607.

World Bank.1995. Constraints Affecting the Agricultural Technology

Dissemination System Including the Need to Strengthen Extension and
Other Support Services. Draft project identification report, Uttar Pradesh
Diversified Agricultural Support Project (UP-DASP). Washington, DC:
The World Bank.

World Bank. 1996. National Agricultural Technology Project. Innovations in

Technology Dissemination Component. SWOT Analysis and Project
Identification Document, First Draft, National Agricultural Technology
Project (NATP), World Bank, Washington DC.

World Bank. 2007. Review of Agricultural Extension System in Sri Lanka. In

Reviving Sri Lanka’s Agricultural Research and Extension System:
Towards More Innovation and Market Orientation. Final draft internal
report. World Bank, Colombo, May, Chapter 4.

World Bank Group. 2008. Ethiopia at a Glance. Washington, DC: The World
Bank.

.
APPENDIX A. LOCATIONS, PARTICIPANTS, AND DATES FOR DATA
COLLECTION

Location Organization or individuals Dates Details

Addis Ababa MOARD 24

– Pre-test April

Agri-Service Ethiopia 24
April

Ethiopian Institute for Agricultural 24

Research (EIAR) April

Oromiya Oromiya Bureau of Agriculture and 24

Region – Rural Development (BOARD) April
Pre-test

Holetta Agricultural Technical and 24

Vocational Education and Training April
(ATVET)

Wolmera Woreda OOARD 24

April

Addis Ababa Panel of experts 2

May

Sasakawa-Global 2000 3
May

MOARD 4 Extension
May management,
planning

Rural Capacity Building Project 4

(RCBP) May

Save-UK 4
May

Prolinnova 4
May

World Vision 4

.
Location Organization or individuals Dates Details

May

SOS-Sahel 4
May

ACDI-VOCA 4
May

MOARD 5 State Minister

May

RED&FS 5
May

USAID 5
May

Oromiya BOARD 6
May

Afar Region Gewanie ATVET 6 Plant science head, 15

May students interviewed

BOARD (Semera) 6 Representatives

May interviewed

RCBP 6 Representative
May interviewed

Assayita Woreda Office of Agriculture 7 Head, 2 experts

and Rural Development (OOARD) May interviewed

FTC, Assayita Woreda 7 2 DAs, farmers

May interviewed

Amhara BOARD
Region

Bure ATVET College

Bure Woreda OOARD

Farmer Training Center (FTC) DAs, farmers

interviewed

Benishangul- Benishangul-Gumuz BOARD 7 Head, 5 experts

.
Location Organization or individuals Dates Details

Gumuz May interviewed

Region

Asossa ATVET 10 Dean, Academic Vice

May Dean interviewed

Assosa Woreda OOARD 8 Head, 5 experts

May interviewed

Salamu Farmers Development 10 DAs, farmers

Group,Kebele: Amba 12 May interviewed

Amba 4 FTC 10 DAs, 6 farmers

May interviewed (1
female)

Oromia Oromia BOARD 7 Vice bureau head, 1

Region May expert interviewed

Katargannat FTC, Assela Woreda 12 DAs, 8 male farmers

May interviewed

Gare Development Group, Assela 12 10 male farmers

Woreda May interviewed

Tiyo Woreda OOARD 13 Head, 4 experts

May interviewed

Chiro ATVET 14 Dean, Vice Dean

May interviewed

Chiro Woreda OOARD 14 Head, 4 experts

May interviewed

Peasant Association, Chiro Woreda 15 DAs, 24 farmers (3

May females)

Arberekete Farmer Training Center, 15 3 DAs, 9 farmers

Chiro Woreda May interviewed

SNNP SNNP Board 11 Head, extension head,

Region May experts interviewed

SNNP Agricultural Research Center 11 Head, deputy

May interviewed

.
Location Organization or individuals Dates Details

Cooperative Development Agency 12 Head, expert

May interviewed

Dilla ATVET 12 Acting head, students

May interviewed

Gedeo Zone- Dilla Town 13 3 experts interviewed

May

Dilla Zuria Worda OOARD 13 Head, deputy,

May extension head,
experts interviewed

Amba Kebele FTC 13 3 DAs, 2 farmers

May interviewed

Chichu Kebele FTC 13 1 farmer interviewed

May

Tigray Tigray BOARD 6 Head interviewed

Region May

Wukro ATVET 7 HR head interviewed

May

Wukro Woreda OOARD 7 Head, administrators,

May experts interviewed

Genfel Farmer Training Center FTC, 8 DAs, farmers

Wukro Woreda May interviewed

Atsibi Woreda OOARD 8 Acting head and

May extension coordinator
interviewed

Farmer cooperative, Atsibi Woreda 9 6 farmers interviewed

May

FTC, Atsibi Woreda 9 3 DAs interviewed

May

.
APPENDIX B: LOGICAL FRAMEWORKS ON STRENGTHENING
ATVETS AND THE EXTENSION SYSTEM

Table 1. Strengthening the ATVETs

Component/Problems Objectives Inputs Outputs Outcomes/Impacts

A. The curriculum is 1. To revise the 1. To involve 1. The revision 1. An effective and

too wide, rigid, and curriculum all the will achieve relevant
very demanding on by making it stakeholders a curriculum that
and manageable
just three main more ensures
shareholders and
disciplines (crop demand- (ATVET, practical- developing
science, animal driven and extension oriented competent and
science and natural practical- bureau, curriculum practical DAs to
resource oriented; and researchers, and multi- support farmers
management) and to farmers) in skilled DAs to increase their
thereby risking the incorporate curriculum ready to use productivity,
review; and different
trainees’ practical relevant household
to include skills of
relevance competence communicati changing incomes, and
building on skills, attitudes and sustainable use of
content in farm behavior of their natural
addition to management, DAs and resources
the content community subsequently
of the three organizing, farmers
pedagogy,
disciplines
marketing
producer
groups;
gender)
B. Lack of sufficient 2. To generate 2. Each ATVET 2. The ATVET 2. The ATVET will
operational funds sufficient will need 2-3 will have be financially
to support the operating years of sufficient strong and able to
ATVET program funds from operating operating provide
demonstratio funds until funds to incentives and
n farms to the supplement operational
make the demonstratio the resources to
ATVET n farms federal/regio teachers
financially become ns allocation
sustainable financially to conduct
and have an viable and effective
effective stable practical
practical training for
training all trainees
facility

C. Lack of adequate 3. To establish 3. To establish 3. Access to 3. Introduction of

information and information two operational ICT will greatly
communication communicati cybercafés, ICT improve skills
technologies and on facilities one for equipment and knowledge of
facilities (ICT) and equip students and and facilities ATVET
libraries in another one will improve instructors and

.
Component/Problems Objectives Inputs Outputs Outcomes/Impacts

all ATVET for teaching the teaching result in greater

colleges for staff and training job satisfaction
training, performance and stability.
research and of the
education ATVET
instructors
and result in
enhanced
quality and
learning
achievement

D. Lack of training 4. To partner 4. To devote 4. Identify 4. Collaborations

facilities and with time and partners for among partner
capital investment. universities, expertise to institutional institutions will
research building collaboratio sustain and
centers and partnership n in order to increase
NGOs with a in resource contribute to institutional
view of use with institutional partnerships
overcoming other capacity leading to
resource partners building. A availability of
constraints particularly focus of the resources that
through universities, training will will transform
facility and research be to Agriculture from
experience centers and develop its current
sharing NGOs plans that technology-
will examine limited state to a
the potential more technology-
for backed state
developing
collaboratio
n.

E. Lack of incentives 5. To create 5. To make 5. ATVET 5. The overall

and performance incentives available instructors performance of
awards (salaries, which will allowances will be the education and
allowances, etc). retain the and to motivated training system
Individuals may ATVET establish and work will improve,
not and perform teachers in performance towards stabilize the
better without the awards for improving teaching
having motivation workforce in outstanding their workforce and
training DAs tuition and performanc thereby
service e, contribute to well
including including trained and
opportunitie promoted competent DAs
s for further to
education department
and training al headship
and higher

.
Component/Problems Objectives Inputs Outputs Outcomes/Impacts

level
positions

F. Poor leadership and 6. To provide 6. To provide 6. The ATVET 6. The overall

management of the training on suitable college performance of
institutions leadership practical leadership the education and
and courses on will improve training system
management leadership its will improve in
of the and performance supporting
colleges management and efficient
including to college efficiency of management and
their staff managing utilization of
resources and utilizing resources into
resources economically
(financial, useful entities.
human and
social
resources)

G. Inappropriate 7. To review 7. To identify an 7. An 7. The colleges will

structure of structure of appropriate appropriate become
coordination. coordination structure for oversight professional
Previously the to ensure that overseeing institution institutions in
colleges were flow of the will enable training highly
under the MOARD information, operations ATVET qualified DAs to
and now some are knowledge and functions colleges to serve farming
under the TVET and of all become households and
agency. communicati ATVETS to stable and rural
on is not ensure conducive communities
interrupted efficient institutions
thereby functioning for training
affecting and middle level
student management manpower
training. of the
colleges

H. Weak coordination 8. To enhance 8. To schedule 8. Enhanced 8. Practical

and scheduling of the the apprenticesh attachment of the
the apprenticeship apprenticeshi apprentice ip program, apprentices will
program. It is held p program to program for scheduled be greatly
during off-season provide six months during improved and the
(October) and ends apprentices when farmers farmers’ combination of
(June) when with strong are doing main field experience
farmers are practical- main farming activities, and timing
beginning to based activities and will result in appropriateness
engage in main experience allow greater job with farmers’
farming activities. and exposure supervision competence main activities
to farmers’ to be done by by the DAs will result in the
field learning subject to work with DAs’ greater

.
Component/Problems Objectives Inputs Outputs Outcomes/Impacts

and working matter model preparedness to

conditions specialists farmers; and work with the
and ATVET provide farmers.
college feedback to
teachers the colleges.

I. Weak linkages 8. To enhance 8. To provide 8. Strengthened 8. The linkages

between the the linkage short-term linkages between
ATVET Colleges between courses and between the ATVETS
and the agricultural ATVET ins-service ATVET Colleges and
extension system Colleges and practical skill Colleges and DAs and FTCs
the training to the will be greatly
agricultural DAs at the agricultural improved
extension FTC level extension resulting in
system system greater
productivity

.
 Table 2. Strengthening the Agricultural Extension System at the Woreda Level
with Linkages to FTCs
Problems/
Objectives Inputs Outputs Outcomes/Impacts
Constraints

A. Subject matter 1. To enhance the 1. To provide in- 1. SMSs will 1. The skills and
specialists (SMS) practical skills service begin knowledge of DAs
lack of practical and knowledge training and organizing and will be enhanced;
training/experienc of SMSs technical delivering therefore, farm
e about farming concerning support for all more relevant households (FHs)
systems, how to SMSs about training will accelerate the
including how to intensify and how farmers programs and intensification and
intensify & diversity the can intensify technical diversification of
diversify these farming their farming support to DAs their farming
different farming systems within systems (i.e. (and to systems; thereby
systems to the woreda, with focus on farmers) within increasing farm
increase farm especially in HVPs) and the woreda to income
households both high- how to enhance their
(FH)income value crops & organize extension
livestock farmers into activities
products and producer within each
NRM practices groups kebele or FTC
B. Lack of adequate 2. To create an 2. To build (or 2. The capacity 2. The technical
physical facilities Agricultural transform) a and expertise training and
for training and Extension large AERC of the SMS expertise of the DA
providing Resource center (about staff will be staff will be
technical and Center 70 m²) w/ enhanced, so strengthened, so
marketing support (AERC) to classroom, they can access they can provide
to farmers and serve as the including at and provide more up-to-date
development focal point for least 2 up-to-date and technical and
agents (DA), the woreda computers relevant market information
including extension (w/Internet), 1 training, to the farmers they
providing access system and to TV with DVD technical serve and, thereby,
to technical and facilitate for training, an support and help increase
market training and overhead market agricultural
information technical projector plus information to productivity &
assistance (TA) training & DAs, model farm incomes
activities resource farmers, and
between SMSs, materials, etc. the broader
DAs & farmers farming
community
C. Lack of operating 3. To improve 3. Where needed, 3. SMSs and 3. The effectiveness
funds to purchase technical and to procure supervisors of the overall
training materials, supervisory motorcycles, will make extension system
operate & support of the plus allocate regular visits to will be
maintain woreda SMSs sufficient each FTC to strengthened,
motorcycles, & supervisors recurrent provide which will
mobile phones, through operating technical and accelerate
etc. to support adequate travel funds to supervisory increases in
both SMSs and and support travel support to the agricultural
supervisors communication and DA staff, as productivity,
funds, plus communicatio well as for improvements in
motorcycles, to n requirements SMSs to farming systems,
enhance their of the SMS conduct special and increases in
technical and training FH income

.
 Problems/
Objectives Inputs Outputs Outcomes/Impacts
Constraints

support supervisors. programs for

services to (However, the model and
DAs source of women
throughout the recurrent farmers,
woreda operating especially on
funds is HVPs and
unclear) NRM practices

D. Low salaries and 4. To motivate 4. To establish a 4.SMSs and 4. The effectiveness

very limited or no the SMS and performance supervisors of the overall
performance supervision based award & will be extension system
incentives staff to provide promotion will be
motivated to
strong and system to strengthened as
regular recognize improve their woreda extension
technical, outstanding performance in workers provide
management& SMSs and providing better support and
supervision supervisors at training, supervisory
support to DAs the woreda, technical services to DAs
zonal and support and and to the broader
regional farming
regular
levels, as well community.
as make supervisory
available per support
diem & other services to the
incentives to DA staff
enhance staff
income

.
 Table 3. Strengthening the Ethiopian Agricultural Extension System with Primary
Focus on the Farmer Training Centers at the Kebele Level
Component/Problems
Objectives Inputs Outputs Impacts
I. Farmer Training 
Centers 
A. DAs lack of practical  1. To strengthen 1. To identify 1. DAs will 1. Farmers will
training/experience  the skills and and then utilize become skilled learn the necessary
about farming  knowledge of competent and competent skills/knowledge to
systems (FS) and  current DAs re: trainers, either in providing intensify/diversify
how to  how to intensify & SMSs, training and their farming
intensify/diversify  diversify FSs with ATVET technical systems and then
farming systems to  
high-value teachers or support to how to market
both ensure 
crops/livestock other farmers about these products in
national food 
security (NFS) and  products (HVPs), specialists to high potential increasing farm
to increase farm  agric. marketing, conduct in- HV crops and income and using
household income  value-chains, etc. service livestock, as improved NRM
(FHI)  plus soft-skills, training well as how to practices to ensure
such as active courses for organize the long-term
teaching/learning DAs in these producer sustainability of
skills & key technical groups (PGs) in their land/water
organizing & “soft” skill “linking resources
producer groups areas farmers to
(social capital) markets,”
including rural
women.

B. Demonstration 2. To transform 2. DAs will 2. DAs will be 2. Farmers will: a)

farms (DFs, which the DFs into an have to be able to provide intensify and/or
are generally effective teaching- trained in farm practical, diversify their FSs,
between 1-2.5 ha)
learning mgt. skills and hands-on and, thereby,
are poorly
developed and/or mechanism in applicable HV training for all increase their
not focused on high- teaching farmers crops & types of agricultural
value (HV) crops, how to produce livestock farmers, productivity and
livestock and other HVPs, as well as practices, as including farm farm incomes;
products aimed at how to use needed well as NRM women and thereby increasing
increasing farm NRM practices; practices, such rural youth in their access to
household (FH)
also, to operate as drip HV crop and inputs, as well as
income; nor are
most FTCs using demonstration irrigation, etc. livestock improving family
needed irrigation farms as an Also, each systems, and nutrition. Also, if
and proper NRM economic FTC will need sustainable successful, these
practices enterprise to up-front NRM practices. DFs will generate
generate needed investment Also, within 2 sufficient revenue
operating funds capital and years, most DFs to cover all FTC
for FTC. operating will be making operating costs
funds (2 yrs) a sufficient
to establish revenue to
economically cover all FTC
viable DFs. operating costs.

.
Component/Problems Objectives Inputs Outputs Impacts

C. Lack of operating 3. To generate 3. Each FTC 3. DAs and the 3. The FTC will be
funds to purchase sufficient will need 1-2 FTC will have financially self-
FTC training operating funds years of sufficient sufficient and able
materials, inputs for
from the DFs to operating operating funds to provide
the demonstration
farm, mobile phone make the FTC funds until the to conduct additional
credit, etc. financially self- DF becomes effective incentives and
sustainable economically practical operational
viable extension and resources for use
training for all by the DAs
FHs with the
kebele

D. DA staff lack of 4. To enable the 4. To provide 4. DAs will 4. FHs and PGs
mobility to visit DAs to make heavy-duty make more will increase their
villages within the regular visits to all bicycles to efficient use technical, social
kebele of their time
villages within the enable DAs to and marketing
in providing
kebele so they can make regular TA directly to skills as they
provide needed farm visits, so FHs and PGs, receive more
technical they can rather than training and
assistance (TA) increase making fewer technical support in
and training, technical visits and pursuing new
especially to the support and spending 30% HVP; also, these
or more of
emerging PGs for services to emerging PGs will
their time
both major food interested FHs walking to the help link farmers to
crops and and emerging different markets and,
emerging HVPs PGs villages thereby, increase
FH income

E. Low DA salaries 5. To improve the 5. To increase 5. DAs will 5. improving the

and little or no morale and in-service pursue long- performance of the
performance awards professional educ. term careers in extension system
and/or incentives for
commitment of the opportunities extension and will have a positive
high performing
DAs DAs, so they can (B.Sc.); also, will begin impact on reducing
be motivated to to make working harder rural poverty,
continue providing available per to improve their increasing FH
useful extension diem to DAs skills and income, improving
services to all FHs (from DF performance, national food
within the kebele revenues) so including being security and
they can promoted to contributing to
increase their supervisory, overall agric.
farm visits; SMS and higher development
and to initiate administrative
new positions
performance
awards for
outstanding
service

F. Staff instability or 6.To reduce the 6. Where 6. DAs 6. Increased job

.
Component/Problems Objectives Inputs Outputs Impacts

high turn-over of repeated transfer feasible, assign assigned to stability will

DA staff at the FTC of DAs between new DAs to a FTCs within improve the overall
or kebele level, different kebeles, FTC in their their home performance of the
largely due to the
so DAs can home woreda woredas will be extension system in
random assignment
of DAs to woredas develop more to reduce staff more satisfied serving the needs
far from their homes effective extension turnover and have of farmers in their
programs and improved job respective kebeles
develop a more performance and woredas
financially since they will
sustainable DFs be accountable
and FTCs to local farmers
in their home
woreda

G. Lack of adequate 7.To improve the 7. To build 7. Improved 7. Classroom and

physical facilities at FTC training and/or equip classrooms, practical training of
most FTCs, facilities and FTC training with simple farmers will be
including
improve the facilities teaching greatly improved
classrooms, offices,
livestock buildings housing facilities (classroom), equipment and due to the
and, especially, the for the DA staff teaching materials, will combination of
very inadequate DA equipment and improve the improved teaching
housing practical teaching facilities; also
training performance improved
facilities (e.g. and confidence housing/living
livestock of the DAs; facilities will result
buildings, deep improved in greater job
wells); also, to housing will satisfaction and
build, furnish result in greater stability.
and improve job satisfaction
the housing and willingness
facilities for of the DAs to
the DA staff stay in local
communities

H. Lack of attention 8.To enable rural 8. T o provide 8. Rural women 8. Rural women
and service being women, especially suitable learn new skills will increase FH
provided to rural female-headed practical to begin income, start
women, since many
FHs, to have full training producing working together in
do not meet the
current “training” access to all courses and poultry, producer groups,
selection criteria extension technical vegetables and increase their
(i.e. 8th grade activities that will services for all (backyard social status with
education) increase their rural women gardening), and FHs and
technical, mgt & on other HVPs and communities
marketing skills horticultural then start
and, thereby, crops, poultry working
increase their FH and other HVP together in PGs
income that women to start
typically marketing these

.
Component/Problems Objectives Inputs Outputs Impacts

produce different HVPs

I. Lack of appropriate 9.To enhance the 9. To provide 9. DAs will 9. Extension will
field ware that attitudes of DAs each DA with improve their become a more
reflects the DAs role as professional appropriate job professional
in providing training
extension workers field ware that performance agency in serving
and technical
advisory services to that are is suitable in and attitudes, FHs and rural
all FHs contributing providing and be willing communities
directly to training and to continue throughout
agricultural and technical working to Ethiopia.
rural development advisory enhance their
services to knowledge,
both FHs and skills and job
producer performance
groups

.
APPENDIX C. EXAMPLES FROM INDIA OF DECENTRALIZED
EXTENSION

Structure of the Decentralized Agricultural Technology Management

Agency (ATMA) in India

Agricultural Technology Management Agency

F W
Governing Board
District U O
(W d ) ATMA
N R
Management
D K
Farm Information & Advisory
Block
Centers (equivalent to FLCs)
(Kebele)

Village Ext. Para- Private

Workers
NG
Tech
Village
Farmer Interest Groups (FIGs) or Women’s Self-Help

Source: Singh, Swanson, and Singh 2006

.
Note: Prior to the introduction of the ATMA model in India, nearly all
“operational” funding for extension programs came from the central government
in the form of pre-defined or “ear-marked” extension activities, such as fertilizer
demonstration packages or new irrigation technologies (generally in the form of
subsidized inputs). Because these pre-allocated government funds for very
specific extension program activities were channeled through separate line
departments (agriculture, animal husbandry, horticulture, etc.), then the district-
and sub-district extension staff had no other program funds available to address
local needs and opportunities that would be of potential value to different farmer
groups within their service area. Therefore, one central feature of the World
Bank financed National Agricultural Technology Project (NATP) was to pilot-
test this new decentralized extension model where program funds were
transferred directly to these new, semi-autonomous, registered ATMAs, as
illustrated above. Therefore, after each Block Technology Teams (BTTs;
equivalent to DAs at the kebele level) developed their annual work plans, in
close consultation with and approval by the local Farmer Advisory Committee
(FAC), then these proposed work plans would be sent directly to the ATMA (i.e.
first through the ATMA management committee and then to the Governing
Board, composed of stakeholder representatives) for final approval and funding.
Therefore, once these work plans were approved by the ATMA, then these
program funds were transferred directly back to each BTT, so these front-line
extension field staff could implement these locally generated and approved
extension programs.

.
 Procedures Used in India to Train the Extension Staff at the District and
Sub-District Levels to Implement a Decentralized, Farmer-led, Market-
driven Extension System

As agricultural extension systems are decentralized, the job responsibilities of

extension staff members change significantly at each system level. Especially at
the district and sub-district levels, the extension staff will need to carry out
important new planning functions in collaborating with local farmer groups if
this more decentralized extension system is to be successfully implemented. In
most cases, the field staff will be unfamiliar with these participatory methods
and will need direct training and technical assistance in learning how to carry out
these new tasks. To understand how to introduce these participatory procedures,
the following diagram outlines the process used in India to actually introduce
these methods and procedures to the field extension staff, as carried out under
the World Bank funded National Agricultural Technology Project (NATP).
Then, on the following page, the implementing procedures used to make this
extension system more market-driven are illustrated. For more information on
all of these procedures, see: Singh, Swanson, and Singh, 2006. p. 203-223

Procedures Used to Train the Extension Staff at the District and Block Levels to
Implement this Decentralized, Farmer-led, Market-driven Extension System in

MANAGE assisted districts in training Invest ATMA Governing Board

staff to conduct PRA & develop SREPs ATMA Director
ATMA Mgt. Committee
11.
10.
1. Train 3. Develop Fund
4. NGOs
2. Conduct Prelim. 3a. Organize Flow Block
PRA Prelim. Ext.
District SREP FIGs/SHGs to
BTT Plans
District
(woreda) 9. Farmer
6. Block Teams Block (kebele) 5. Train Block Tech. Advisory
Conduct Teams (BTTs) Committees

8. BTTs coordinate with NGOs to FIG SHG FIG

7. Block Teams organize SHGs and FIGs; then BTTs
Develop Block conduct extension activities for
Ext. Plan (BEPs) different FIGs/SHGs Small Farm Households

.
 Procedures Used to Develop a More Market-Driven Extension
System in India1

Terms used: ATMA=Agricultural Technology Management Agency (district level registered

organization that coordinated all agricultural research and extension activities within the district;
PRA=Participatory Rural Appraisal; AMC= ATMA Management Committee; SREP=Strategic Research
and Extension Plan for the district (woreda) level; BTT=Block Technology Team (equivalent to DAs at
FLC level); FIGs=Farmer Interest Groups (FIGs will transform into producer groups after the first
growing season, once the members have been successfully trained by the field extension staff); and
HVC/P=High-value crops/products) KVK=Farm Science Center (multidisciplinary team of researchers at
the district or woreda level)

Note: There are four axioms that are essential to a successful market-driven
extension system:

¾ The first axiom is that if there isn’t a market; don’t encourage farmers to
produce a specific crop or product. Therefore, the first task to be carried out
is to assess the potential markets for different high-value crops or products
that can be successfully produced in different blocks within the district.
¾ The second axiom is that if farmers cannot easily transport the product to
market; look for more promising products that can be more easily marketed.
¾ The third axiom is that if the crop (or product) cannot be successfully grown
or produced within the district due to unfavorable agro-ecological conditions,
then look for more promising crops or products that are well suited or better
suited to each district and block (e.g. kebele).
¾ The fourth axiom is to diversify into a variety of different high-value
crops/products that are suitable for different Farmer-Interest-Groups (FIGs,
generally men farmers in India) or Women’s Interest Groups (WIGs) within
the district. This approach will mitigate risk by not saturating the market with
one or two products and, thereby, driving down prices.

1 Source: Singh, Swanson, and Singh, 2006. p. 203-223.

.
APPENDIX D. ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Reference Findings Implications/ remarks/

questions

*Abate, H. (2007). Review of Both public and NGO extension Need more learning in skills
Extension Systems Applied in important for innovation
Ethiopia with Special emphasis to
the Participatory Demonstration FTC should be focal point for all NGOs are in pastoral areas but
and Training Extension System. actors in innovation system not public; dual public/private
Food and Agriculture systems for here?
Groups are important
Organization of the United At least bring NGOs “into the
Nations. Different clientele have different fold”
interest
More participation needed
Need best fit approaches for
Background/details: Review various agro-ecosystems
extension approaches & identify (objectives, structure, methods,
strengths etc.)

Rural not “agricultural” extension

promotes HIV & other cross-
cutting issues

DA to be communicator for
innovation not tech. transfer
person

Need for networking, social

learning, negotiation between DA
& clientele

Abegaze, S., A. Tola, and S. Will need higher agricultural Opportunity for private sector
Demeke. 2004. The balance education to implement ADLI to step in
between middle and high level policy
human resource training in the Extension needs ATVETs/
agricultural sector of Ethiopia. In In 5 years 150,000 people need to intermediate level training
Proceedings of the 13th Annual be trained at intermediate level
Conference of the Ethiopian ATVETs responsible for
Society of Animal Production intermediate training; currently
(ESAP), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, only meet half of the projected
August. requirement

Aberra, A. and Teshome, A. Proposes operational model for Specialized vs. generalized
2009. The Agricultural/Pastoral

.
Reference Findings Implications/ remarks/
questions

Extension System in Ethiopia: FTC DA debate

Opportunities, Challenges and
Future Prospects. Draft Report of Irrigation extension left out; Institutional pluralism needs to
a Panel Discussion, March 09, marketing not in curricula be considered
Addis Ababa. Suggest additional DA courses **Need for independent
like policies, communication evaluation—is this our study?

FTCs need monitoring and support

3 types of DAS: (1) trained under **Need to compare federal to

previous system & now upgraded regional TVTs
(experienced); (2) DAs trained at
federal ATVETs; (3) DAs trained
at regions

*Ashworth, V. (2005). The Need a strategic vision for future Diverse country- no one size
Challenges of Change for of extension fits all
Agricultural Extension in
Ethiopia. A Discussion Paper. Current focus on production and More decentralization,
Federal Democratic Republic of high inputs participation- develop core
Ethiopia. Addis Ababa. participatory team in each
“Modern technologies = instant region
commercial farmers” mindset
Change mindset; farms >
Background/details: Discussion Farmers need business, production units
paper focused on change for the management, analytical not just
World Bank technical skills Need more capacity

Need demand-driven operational

paradigm

Access to information
underdeveloped

Pay attention to gender

Mature extension = pluralistic

extension

*Bekele, E., Ponniah, A., and Mixed results, but: PADETES has We have to go beyond
Kisamba-Mugerwa, W. (2006). brought significant achievements numbers and adoption, seed
Review of Agricultural Extension including: increased production of and fertilizer to increased
Impacts in Ethiopia. Prepared for food grains; rise in fertilizer and capacity to demand services
the World Bank Office, Addis improved seeds use; increased (farmers) and to provide
Ababa. number of households holistic services (DAs)
participating in extension
packages; and increased More focus on marketing,
promotion and implementation of community participation,
Background/details: Review for learning
World Bank agricultural commodity
development, specialization and

.
Reference Findings Implications/ remarks/
questions

diversification plans

Positive developments:
decentralization & capacity
building at woredas; MoARD
structure bringing partners
together; formation of marketing
division in MoARD; increased
community participation via
FTCs; transformation from
subsistence to market oriented
agriculture; recent focus on
capacity building,. institutional
learning = improved # & quality
of DAs

Bernard, T., Gabre-Madhin, E. Despite the spread of cooperatives Big diversity in the country
and Taffesse, A.S. (2007). – they existed in less than 15% of
Smallholders’ Commercialization districts in 1994 and nearly 35% in Cooperatives may not be the
through Cooperatives. A 2005 – there are important answer to farmer organization
Diagnostic for Ethiopia. IFPRI disparities across regions. Within for extension
Discussion Paper 00722. regions, cooperatives tend to be
Washington, D.C: International located in areas that already have
Food Policy Research Institute. better access to markets and lower
exposure to price and
environmental risks.
Background/details: Empirical At household level participation is
study covering entire country on only 9%, with poorer households
cooperatives less likely to participate.

While cooperatives obtain higher

prices for members, they are not
associated with a significant
increase in the overall share of
cereal production sold by their
members.

These average results hide

considerable heterogeneity in the
impact across households.

Smaller farmers tend to reduce

their marketable surplus as a result
of higher prices, while the
opposite is true for larger farmers.

Buchy, M. and Basaznew, F. In spite of gender No gender policy or awareness

(2005). Gender-blind training/mainstreaming, BoARD

.
Reference Findings Implications/ remarks/
questions

Organizations Deliver Gender- fails to involve women in Limited transparency &

biased Services: The Case of extension participation
Awasa Bureau of Agriculture in
Southern Ethiopia. Gender, Gender considerations missing at Need systemic gender
Technology and Development. all levels of organization sensitization
SAGA Publications.

Carlsson, F., Kohlin, G., People prefer public goods to Extension “packages” may not
Mekonnen, A. and Yesuf, M. extension package, unless always be what farmers
(2005). Are Agricultural combined with insurance want/need
Extension Packaged what
Ethiopian Farmers Want? A Participation/demand-driven
Stated Preference Analysis. focus needed
Working Papers in Economics
no. 172. Department of
Economics, Goteborg University.

Background/details: Stated
preference survey

Davis, K, Ekboir, J. M., AET conventionally viewed for Need new ways of thinking
Mekasha, W., Ochieng, C. building human & scientific
Spielman, D. J., and Zerfu, E. capital, but has vital role in Innovation systems approach
(2007). Strengthening building capacity of organizations Need capacity
agricultural education and & individuals to transmit & adapt
training in Sub-Saharan Africa new applications of existing
from an innovation systems information, new products &
perspective: Case studies of processes, & new organizational
Ethiopia and Mozambique. cultures and behaviors.
IFPRI Discussion Paper 00736.
Washington, D.C: International Importance of improving AET
Food Policy Research Institute. systems by strengthening the
innovative capabilities of AET
organizations and professionals;
changing organizational cultures,
Background/details: Case study behaviors, & incentives; &
of AET building innovation networks and
linkages

Dercon, S., Gilligan, D. O., Receiving at least 1 visit from DA Extension is important!
Hoddinott, J. and Woldehanna, T. raised consumption growth by 7%,
(2008). The Impact of Roads and reduced poverty 10%
Agricultural Extension on
Consumption Growth and
Poverty in Fifteen Ethiopian

.
Reference Findings Implications/ remarks/
questions

Villages. Washington, D.C:

IFPRI Discussion Paper 00840.
International Food Policy
Research Institute.

Background/details: Econometric
modeling/survey

Efa, N., Gorman, M., and Phelan, Indigenous knowledge (IK) (local Pay attention to IK
J. (2005). Implications of an maize, informal seed systems,
Extension Package Approach for traditional pest control) Acknowledge & take
Farmers’ Indigenous Knowledge: disappearing, due in part to advantage of diversity
The Maize Extension Package in promotion of modern packages Need changed mindset by
South-western Ethiopia. Journal research and extension to IK
of International Agricultural and Extension and research personnel
Extension Education. 12 (3) pp. prefer modern methods
67-78.

Background/details: Qual/quant
package study

*Ethiopian Economic Majority of extension packages Need capacity/training at

Association/Ethiopian Economic crop production; supply driven lower levels and for DAs
Policy Research Institute. (2006).
Evaluation of the Ethiopian Packages formulated at federal Need strategies, planning,
Agricultural Extension with level M&E
Particular Emphasis on the Lack of regional strategies Need participation/training
Participatory Demonstration and
Training Extension System DA training inadequate; need Reach out to pastoral areas
(PADETES). Addis Ababa. more practical; they use individual
methods Need baseline survey

Disadoption of packages 72% Need research extension

Background/details: Country- advisory council
wide survey Approach not participatory
Focus on and equip farmer
Distribution channels/institutions organizations
flawed; formal seed weak; input &
output marketing lacking; Use local institutions
transport: monopolies Land tenure: deal with
Not meeting ADLI objectives Need policies on marketing
Leaving out cash crops, NRM, Encourage pluralism
livestock, private & NGOs

Gender and culture left out

DAs do non-extension activities

FAO. (2008). Key messages from PADETES not implemented Need pluralism, coordination

.
Reference Findings Implications/ remarks/
questions

a Study on Ethiopia’s Extension properly of extension

Systems. Based on the Work of
Habtemariam Abate. Document New initiatives: ICT, Suggest operation model of
ET-TRS-08/ext/02. Project: marketing/credit institutions, DA
TCPF/ETH/3101. Food and Ethiopian Commodit7y Exchange
(ECX) good FTC to be focal area/platform
Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations Sub Regional NGOs have many innovative & ?How do de-politicize FTCs?
Office for Eastern Africa and participatory approaches
FAO Representation in Ethiopia. Focus on groups
Addis Ababa. Both NGOs and government Need communication
systems viable strategies
Background/details: Review

FAO. (2008). Lessons of the Extension must be backed up by Location-specific approaches

Asian Green Revolution for policies (best fit)
Ethiopia’s Agricultural Extension
and 15 Key Messages on Investment in subsidies is good Put marketing agents at
Extension in Ethiopia. extension centers
Focus on high-potential areas, not
PowerPoint Highlights. all over Separate extension from
Document ET-TRS-08/ext/06. regulation
Project: TCPF/ETH/3101. Food Important to reduce risk
and Agriculture Organization of (irrigation, stable prices, etc.) Avoid rivalry between
the United Nations Sub Regional commodity & extension depts.
Office for Eastern Africa and Need practical links between
FAO Representation in Ethiopia. institutions Capacity building essential
Addis Ababa.
Extension must be mobile Links to agricultural
education, marketing, credit,
Marketing and diversification not just research
Background/details: Based on essential
Kalim Qamar’s work
Look at urban & peri-urban
agriculture

Must include other topics: HIV,

NRM, population

Must include women & youth

Ferguson, A., and Romboli, S. The Rural Capacity Building Government is investing
(2004). Environmental and Social Project (RCBP) major investment heavily in capacity
Management Framework. E889. in agricultural sector, organized
Rural Capacity Building Project. into 4 components: Capacity must be beyond head
The Federal Democratic Republic training to teaching problem
of Ethiopia. 1. Technical and Vocational solving, critical thinking,
Education and Training for systems perspectives
Agriculture -(US$30 Million):
finance recurrent expenditure; Need to focus on capacity at
Background/details: Project civil works for upgrading & woreda and kebele levels
document maintenance of existing vocational

.
Reference Findings Implications/ remarks/
questions

colleges & construction of new

buildings at existing colleges;
procurement of goods & services;
& long term & short-term training
to upgrade skills of teaching staff

2. Agricultural Advisory Services

at Farmers Training Centers- (US
$55 Million): finance recurrent
expenditure, civil works for
upgrading & maintenance of
existing FTCs & construction of
new centers; procurement of
goods and services; and long-term
and short-term training to upgrade
skills of extension staff

3. Agricultural Research - (US$

10 Million): finance recurrent
expenditure, civil works for
upgrading and maintenance of
existing federal & regional
research centers; procurement of
goods & services; & long-term &
short-term training to upgrade
skills of federal & regional
research staff.

4. Institutional Capacity Building -

(US$ 5 Million):finance training
programs, study tours, workshops,
provide technical assistance in
financial administration,
governance, procurement,
accounts, management
information system, M&E

Finance training & assistance to

increase capacity of cooperatives,
farmers' organizations & local
communities to effectively
manage farmers training centers &
in contracting & evaluating the
performance DAs

Gebre-ab, Neway. (2006). Commercialization seen by GOE Land tenure an issue

Commercialization of as focal point of agricultural
Smallholder Agriculture in Development Lack of information a problem
Ethiopia. EDRI Notes and Paper

.
Reference Findings Implications/ remarks/
questions

Series No.3. Ethiopian Cooperatives aggregate output

Development Research Institute.
Addis Ababa Risk and uncertainty affect
farmers

*Gebremedhin, B., Hoekstra, D., Strategy: transform from Fit service to market-oriented
and Tegegne, A. (2006). subsistence to market-oriented strategy
Commercialization of Ethiopian agriculture
Agriculture: Extension Service Develop pluralistic,
from Input Supplier to Undergoing transition to FTCs interactive, market-oriented
Knowledge Broker and operational models
Government (woreda level)
Facilitator. IPMS Working Paper provides most extension Create agricultural innovation
No. 1. Improving Productivity teams at the federal & regional
and Market Success of Ethiopian While market-oriented in talk, levels to help develop
Farmers project, International food-security oriented in action innovative approaches &
Livestock Research Institute capacities at the woreda level
(ILRI). Nairobi, Kenya. Main focus production-oriented
package approach (household, Keep updating ATVET
Background/details: PRA in 8 regular & minimum are the 3 main curricula based on learning
woredas of 4 main regions to packages) process
assess extension service
development, & analyze Major problems: top-down, non-
approaches & processes participatory approach, primarily
supply driven, low capacity of
experts & DAs, low morale, high
turnover, shortage of operational
budget & facilities

Kassa, B., and Abebaw, D. PADETES not participatory No one size fits all strategy
(2004). Challenges Facing
Agricultural Extension Agents: A 1:1090 ratio DA to farmer ratio; Need adaptive trials
Case Study from South-western coverage inadequate
Bottom up not top down
Ethiopia. African Development Constraints to adoption = high
Bank. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. input prices, lack of inputs, late Need capacity for DAs
delivery of inputs, no materials or
transport for extension, limited
Background/details: Empirical skills/experience, technologies
study in SW Ethiopia unsuitable

Kassa, B. 2004a. Postgraduate Shortage of experienced & Systemic problem of

training in agricultural sciences in qualified instructors, brain drain, education in Ethiopia
Ethiopia. Higher Education lack of finances, equipment &
Policy 17: 49–70. library negatively affected post-
graduate programs

Kassa, B. 2004b. Linkages of While higher education institutes Need massive mindset
higher education with have contributed to agricultural changes in entire agricultural

.
Reference Findings Implications/ remarks/
questions

agricultural research, extension sector, curricula no longer relevant innovation system

and development. Unpublished & unable to respond to labor
manuscript, Alemaya University, market and current realities
Alemaya, Ethiopia.

Kassa, B. (2003). Agricultural Same as Kassa (2002).

Extension in Ethiopia: The Case
of Participatory Demonstration
and Training Extension System.
Journal of Social Development in
Africa. 18 (1) pp. 49-84

Kassa, B. (2002). Constraints to Extension programs and policies Participation

Agricultural Extension Work in formulated without consideration
Ethiopia: The Insiders’ View. S. of farmers’ opinion Linkages
Afr. J. Agric. Ext./S. Afr. Tydskr. Expectations of DAs should
Landbouvoorl., (31), pp. 63-79. Various extension approaches
biased against livestock change

Research and extension activities

Background/details: Historical carried out by different
review & survey examines organizations without coordination
principal obstacles to agricultural
extension work in Ethiopia. Not participatory

Research-extension linkage poor

Extension agents involved in

activities not related to normal
duties

Number of extension workers in

the country is small

Qualification & communication

skills of DAs inadequate

Host of factors, most policy

related, obstruct DAs from work

Kassa, H. 2005. Historical Radical shifts of policy: feudalism Extension needs to evolve
Development and Current – Marxism – free market
Challenges of Agricultural Must actively engage
Extension with Particular Donor-driven changes too stakeholders

Emphasis on Ethiopia. Ethiopian Challenges are policy-related, user Need co-learning process
Economic Association environment, institutional, & where individuals &
(EEA)/Ethiopian Economic technical institutions learn from
Policy Research Institute experience
(EEPRI) Working Paper No.

.
Reference Findings Implications/ remarks/
questions

2/05. Addis Ababa: EEA/EEPRI.

Kelemework, Fasil Wubneh. Despite efforts livelihoods We need participation and

2007. Realizing the Dream: unchanged demand from the bottom
Agricultural Extension for Rural
Livelihoods Development in In all 3 historic extension regimes Get away from
Ethiopia. Institute of Social extension is production oriented, production/input focus
Sciences Graduate School of focusing on technology supply
Development Studies MA Thesis. strategies to increase agricultural
production & productivity.

Role of extension to promote

agricultural inputs using various
methods & approaches.

Most efforts were top down, donor

driven & biased to few crop
technology packages & highly
influenced by the respective
political systems

Kelemework F. and H. Kassa The period is also known to have Government focused on
(2006) Assessment of the Current an aggressive extension extension but maybe need to
Extension System of Ethiopia: A intervention & total # of change
Closer Look at Planning and participant farmers reached was methods/approach/mindset
Implementation, Issue paper reported at 4.2 million from a total
2/2006. Ethiopian Economic of about 10 million small scale
Association/ Ethiopian Economic farmers in the country
Policy Research Institute (Kelemework and Kassa, 2006)
(EEA/EEPRI). Addis Ababa.

Lemma, M. and Hoffmann, V. National Extension Intervention Move from packages to

2005. The Agricultural Program (NEIS) starts with tech options approach, from
Knowledge System in Tigray, identification & packaging rather persuasion to communication
Ethiopia: Empirical Study about than understanding farming
its Recent History and Actual system, complexities of local areas DAs need commitment
Effectiveness. Conference on DAs not supported by
International Agricultural Packages lack agro-ecological
specificity supervisors who are focused
Research for Development. on results
Deutscher Tropentag, Stuttgart- Should help farmers adapt
Hohenheim, October 11-13. Performance indicators need
revision

Spielman, D. J., K. E. Davis, M. Go beyond technological to Need to further explore

Negash, and G. Ayele. (2008). institutional innovation policies & programs to create
Rural Innovation Systems and space for market & civil
Networks: Findings from a Study Innovation processes dependent on society actors to participate in
of Ethiopian Smallholders. IFPRI state intervention smallholder innovation

.
Reference Findings Implications/ remarks/
questions

Discussion Paper No. 00759. State may be crowding out other networks
Washington, DC: International actors
Food Policy Research Institute.
Need policies & programs to
Background/details: Empirical strengthen innovative capabilities
piece to examine smallholder
innovation networks

Spielman, D., J. Ekboir, K. Ag Ed & training should go Innovation systems thinking

Davis, C. O. Ochieng. (2008). An beyond building human &
innovation systems perspective scientific capital to building Organization & management
on strengthening agricultural capacity of organizations & of extension
education and training in sub- individuals to transmit & adapt Incentives
Saharan Africa. Agricultural new information, products,
Systems 98: 1-9. processes, & organizational
cultures, & behaviors

Spielman, D. J., M. Negash, K. Ethiopia’s innovation system Synergy will require policy,
Davis, and G. Ayele. (2007). growing in complexity: new organizational, & institutional
Agricultural innovation in actors, policies, technologies, mechanisms
Ethiopia: A systems overview of relationships
opportunities and constraints. In Baseline survey would help to
E. Wale, S. Regassa, D. Gebre- Opportunities for synergies exist assess effects of new programs
Michael, and B. Emana, on the poor
Unknown how this will affect the
Reversing rural poverty in poor
Ethiopia: Dilemmas and critical
issues. Proceedings of the 9th
annual conference of the
Agricultural Economics Society
of Ethiopia, pp. 193-213.

Spielman, D.J., M. Negash, K. Public sector single most Importance of partnership in

Davis, and G. Ayele. (2006). The important source of innovation for improving smallholder
smallholder farmer in a changing smallholders livelihoods
world: The role of research,
extension and education in But private companies & CSOs Capacity
Ethiopian agriculture. Ethiopian becoming increasingly important
Policies
Strategy Support Program Cooperation among different
(ESSP) Policy Conference Brief public agencies, & between public
No. 12. Addis Ababa: IFPRI- agencies & private sector & civil
EDRI. society weak

Policies on science/technology &

Background/details: Empirical business/investment have yet to
piece to map agricultural. provide incentives to stimulate
investment in pro-poor

.
Reference Findings Implications/ remarks/
questions

innovation system of Ethiopia partnerships

Limited capacity at all levels of

the system—federal, regional &
local—makes cooperation &
policy implementation difficult.

Torkelsson, A. (2007). Men and women access different Focus on gender

Resources, Not Capital: A Case social networks with women
Study of the Gendered having bonded/relational resources Networks important
Distribution and Productivity of that will only bring economic
Social Network Ties in Rural returns when bridged/linked to
Ethiopia. Rural Sociology 72(4), men’s networks
2007, pp. 583-607.

.
APPENDIX E : ACRONYMS

ADLI Agricultural Development-led Industrialization

AEZ Agro-ecological zone

AGRA Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa

ASE Agri-service Ethiopia

ATMA Agricultural Technology Management Agency

ATVET Agricultural Technical and Vocational Education and Training

BMGF Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

BOARD Bureau of Agriculture and Rural Development

BPR Business Process Reengineering

CIPP Comprehensive Integrated Package Projects

CADU Chilalo Agriculture Development Unit

DA Development agent

ECX Ethiopian commodity exchange

EDRI Ethiopian Development Research Institute

EEA Ethiopian Economic Association

EEPRI Ethiopian Economic Policy Research Institute

EIAR Ethiopian Institiute of Agricultural Research

ESE Ethiopian Seed Enterprise

FFS Farmer field school

FRG Farmer research group

FSCB Food Security Coordination Bureau

REG Farmer research extension group

FTC Farmer training center

.
FTC-MC Farmer training center management committee

GDP Gross domestic product

GOE Government of Ethiopia

HV High value

HVC High value crop

ICT Information and Communication Technology

IECAMA Imperial Ethiopian College of Agriculture and Mechanical Arts

ILRI International Livestock Research Institute

IPMS Improving productivity and market success (ILRI program)

IWMI International Water Management Institute

JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency

MFI Micro-finance institution

MOARD Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development

MOE Ministry of Education

NAIEP National Extension Intervention Program

NGO Non-government organization

NRM Natural resource management

OOARD Office of Agriculture and Rural Development

PASDEP Plan for Accelerated and Sustained Development to End Poverty

PPP Public-private partnership

RCBP Rural Capacity Building Program

SG-2000 Sasakawa Global 2000

SMS Subject matter specialist

SSA Sub-Saharan Africa

T&V Training and Visit

.
TVET Technical Vocational and Educational Training

WAC Woreda Advisory Committee

WADU Wolayita Agriculture Development Unit

WELC Woreda extension linkage center

.
APPENDIX F: DESK REVIEW FINDINGS
The desk review for this study reviewed at least 30 empirical studies and issued
papers on agricultural extension and education in Ethiopia. Below we will
discuss the major findings from past reviews of Ethiopian extension. These can
be broken down into approaches taken by the Government of Ethiopia relating to
extension; systems, management, and linkages; infrastructure and resources;
knowledge and capabilities; and the enabling environment.

Approaches by the government on extension

Extension in Ethiopia has gone through radical policy shifts in the past 50 years,
from feudalism to Marxism to a free market system (Kassa 2005). Currently,
extension is mostly provided by the public sector, operating in a decentralized
manner where extension is implemented at the woreda (district) level. Limited
extension is conducted by NGOs and the private sector, usually working through
the woreda-level BOARDs.

While commercialization of agriculture is seen by the government as a focal

point for agricultural development (Gebre-ab 2006), this market orientation does
not show up in action (Gebremedhin et al. 2006). Instead, the government
approach is very food-security–oriented rather than market-oriented.

In practice, much of the production and food security focus has been
implemented in a top-down, supply-driven way from the federal level to achieve
national goals (Abate 2007; EEA 2006; Gebremedhin et al. 2006; Kassa and
Abebaw 2004; Kassa 2002; Kelemework 2007). The emphasis in extension on
production, technology, and food security is also seen by the fact that DAs are
still being trained under the three areas of crops, livestock, or NRM, rather than
marketing or commercial agriculture. For the main part, extension tends to focus
on crops, especially cereals, and to leave out cash crops, NRM, and livestock
(EEA 2006; Kassa 2002). It does so using a production-oriented package
approach (Gebremedhin et al. 2006). The Ethiopian PADETES approach offers
three main extension packages, which are formulated at the federal level:
household, regular, and minimum.

In extension programs, there is little attention to gender, culture, youth,

HIV/AIDS, agro-ecosystem variance, or local demands (Ashworth 2005; EEA
2006). While there has been gender training and mainstreaming in some Bureaus

.
of Agriculture, women are not involved in extension, and gender considerations
are missing at all levels (Buchy and Basaznew 2005).

Also, indigenous knowledge, which is an important component of an innovation

system, is not appreciated enough in the system and is disappearing in part due
to the promotion of modern packages, which tend to be preferred by extension
and research (Efa et al. 2006).

There is a need to fit extension approaches to various agro-ecological zones

(Abate 2007; Lemma and Hoffman 2005); however, most packages are
formulated at the federal level (EEA 2006). Irrigation extension is also neglected
in the approach (Aberra and Teshome 2009). There is a great need for a strategic
vision of the future of extension (Ashworth 2005).

Systems/management and linkages

Ethiopia’s agricultural innovation system is growing in complexity: new actors,
policies, technologies, and relationships are affecting the system (Spielman et al.
2007). However, the public sector is the single most important player, especially
in terms of inputs, at the local level for smallholders. The private sector and
NGOs, while becoming increasingly important, are often left out of extension
initiatives, or cooperation is weak (EEA 2006; Spielman et al. 2007). However,
NGOs in particular have many innovative and participatory approaches (FAO
2008a, b).

Research and extension activities are carried out by different organizations

without much coordination (Kassa 2002). Thus these linkages are often poor.
While extension falls under the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development,
most research activities come under the EIAR. While EIAR attempts to address
this through research-extension coordinators or a department focused on
coordinating research and extension, frequent reshuffling and changes within
departments does not allow this to work.

Knowledge and capabilities

Capacity is a major issue within the extension system; many DAs and experts
have low capacity and morale. The DA position suffers from high turnover
(Gebremedhin et al. 2006).

The agricultural education system is also constrained by a shortage of

experienced and qualified teachers (some ATVET instructors had to be hired

.
from outside of Ethiopia) (Kassa 2004a). At the training institutes, there are also
the problems of brain drain, lack of finances, equipment, and facilities. Kassa
(2004b) also noted that higher education institutes in Ethiopian agriculture have
irrelevant curricula and are unable to respond to the labor market.

Agricultural education and training such as the ATVETs are conventionally

viewed as a means for building human and scientific capital, but it is also
important to recognize that this training also has a vital role in building capacity
of organizations and individuals to transmit and adapt new applications of
existing information, new products and processes, and new organizational
cultures and behaviors. It is thus important to improve training systems by
strengthening the innovative capabilities of organizations and professionals;
changing organizational cultures, behaviors, and incentives; and building
innovation networks and linkages (Davis et al. 2007; Spielman et al. 2008).

DAs and other extension staff appear to have limited skills for innovation,
networking, social learning, policies, farmer group development, and negotiation
(Abate 2007; Aberra and Teshome 2009). The DA training should focus on
communication for innovation, not just technology transfer (Abate 2007).
Capacity is also lacking, among DAs, extension administrators, and bureau
heads, to effectively participate in priority setting, planning, and evaluation of
extension programs.

Similarly, among extension clientele, men and women farmers are in need of
business, management, and analytical skills in addition to technical skills, but
this is not currently part of extension outreach. Most of all, the men and women
farmers in Ethiopia need to be able to make decisions, voice demand, and play a
part in developing extension’s priorities and evaluating its outcomes: in short,
they need empowerment.

There appears to be a mindset among extension and research staff that by

adopting new technologies, farmers will become instant commercial farmers.
But this is not enough; farmers also need new skills that go beyond the technical,
such as those for business, management, and analysis (Ashworth 2005; Kassa
2002).

Another problem is the use of DAs for non-extension activities (EEA 2006;
Kassa 2002). This includes the distribution of fertilizer, collection of credit and
taxes, and other government activities that do not typically fall under the
mandate of extension.

.
While there have been complaints in the past that the extension coverage or the
number of total agents in the country is inadequate (Kassa and Abebaw 2004;
Kassa 2002), this no longer seems to be the case with the assignment of three
DAs to every kebele. Complaints or issues are more likely to center around the
quality of development agents rather than the quantity.

Infrastructure and resources

Scholars agree that the FTC should be the focal point for all of the actors within
the innovation system (Abate 2007). However, the FTCs need monitoring and
support (Aberra and Teshome 2009).

Because FTCs are relatively new, not much has appeared in the literature as of
yet. This also goes for the ATVETs, which began training DAs only about five
years ago, and thus there is not much information as to how the ATVETs
operate.

Enabling environment
Extension must be backed up by enabling policies (FAO 2008 a, b). However,
these are often formulated and implemented without due regard to farmers’
opinions (Kassa 2002). Policies and programs are needed that go beyond
technological to institutional innovation, and strengthen innovative capabilities
of government agricultural staff and farmers (Spielman et al. 2008). In some
cases the state, through its policies, may be crowding out other innovation actors
who could play a role. Thus policies on science and technology, or business and
investment, are needed to provide incentives that bring about development in
rural areas (Spielman et al. 2006).

With regard to the enabling environment, distribution channels and institutions

are flawed. The formal seed system is very weak, there is a lack of input and
output markets, and there are monopolies in the transport system (EEA 2006).
Many of the constraints to adoption are due to the lack of inputs or their high
prices and late delivery (Kassa and Abebaw 2004).

Other major constraints that affect extension indirectly are the high cost of
inputs, lack of inputs, late delivery of inputs, weak seed systems, transportation
problems with the input system, monopolies on input markets, and lack of
communication and information sharing within the extension line departments
from federal to kebele level. Extension at times has also overly focused on
production, leaving out critical sectors like marketing, to the detriment of small-

.
scale maize farmers who experienced a price collapse in 2001/02 as a result of
overproduction. Linkages are poor between research and extension and within
the extension line ministries from the federal to the kebele levels.

However, there are some positive steps taking place. One is the use of
information and communication technology (ICT) in agriculture, and setting up
of marketing and credit institutions. Another innovation is the institution of the
Ethiopian Commodity Exchange (ECX) in 2008 (FAO 2008a, b). The ECX is a
completely electronic system that markets cereals, coffee, sesame, and other
crops.

PADETES reviews
There have been several reviews of the PADETES system. The major one,
conducted by the EEA/EEPRI, evaluated PADETES in 2005 (EEA 2006).
According to their results, Ethiopia’s current PADETES model has shown the
following significant achievements:

▪ Reached many farmers equitably

▪ Increased productivity in some cases
▪ Increased production of grains
▪ Increased use of fertilizer and improved seed
▪ Increased numbers of participating households in extension packages
At the same time, on the negative side, PADETES also showed the following:

▪ Majority of extension packages are on crop production

▪ Extension is supply-driven
▪ Extension packages are formulated at the federal level and there is a lack of
regional strategies
▪ Narrow focus on cereal crops
▪ Limited focus on cash crops and animals
▪ Incomplete use of packages by farmers with 75 percent disadoption (started
but not continued)
▪ Limitations in infrastructure, marketing, and inputs affected implementation
▪ Limited participation by women farmers

.
▪ Limited training for extension workers
The PADETES program has been an aggressive extension intervention that has
resulted in a total number of 4.2 million participants from a total of about 10
million small-scale farmers in the country (Kelemework and Kassa 2006).

In other impact studies of extension in Ethiopia, researchers showed that

receiving at least one visit from a DA raised production growth by seven
percent, and reduced poverty by 10 percent (Dercon et al. 2008).

.
Appendix G- Adama workshop attendees

Name Position Affiliation

Dr Aberra Deressa State Minister MOARD

H. E. Ato Gobena Abate Parliament

Abdo Adem Parliament

H.E. Ato Aleleigne Fantaye Parliament

H.E. Ato Getachew Tselo Parliament

H.E. Ato Kebede Olbemo Parliament

H.E. Ato Daniel Hailemariam Parliament

H.E. Ato Kifle Hailemariam Parliament

H.E. Ato Merkeneh Moltarie Parliament

H.E Ato Rihana Aman Parliament

Ato Berhanu W/Michael Head, Food Security MOARD

W/ro Zertehun Seyoum Head, Gender MOARD

Ato Tarekegn Tsige Head, Public Relations MOARD

Ato Illu Alemeyehu Expert MOARD

Ato Alemu Eibsa Regional Extension Head Afar

Ato Ibrahim Mohamed Woreda head Afar

Mr. Abubakar Mohammed Research-Afar Afar

Mr. Negussie Gorfu Expert-livestock/pastoral Afar

Ato Alemu Admassu Regional Extension Head Amhara

Ato Abebaw Tadele Development Agent Amhara

Ato Alemayehu Sewenet Development Agent Amhara

Ato Fekadu Tafer Development Agent Amhara

Ato Belstie Tiruneh Head, Dejen Woreda Amhara

Mesfin Astateke Expert- cooperatives? Amhara

Ato Kindu Amera Development Agent Benishangul-Gumuz

.
Name Position Affiliation

Ato Yirga Ayele Woreda head Benishangul-Gumuz

Abdulhatiz Bedru Acting Head Benishangul-Gumuz (Assosa

ATVET)

Ato Abduselam Ahmed Bureau Head Dire Dawa

Ato Ahmed Mohamed Planning Dire Dawa

Dr. Seyoum Bedeyie Livestock Res. Process EIAR

Dir.

Ato Ibrahim Mohammed Linkage Head Federal

Gezahegn Tadesse Livestock head Federal

Elias Awol NRM Head Federal

Ato Tsegaw Seyoum Extension Expert Federal

Ato Gatwich Gatluak Gambella

Ato David Uduru Extension Dept. Head Gambella

Ato Teklu Tesfaye ATVET Head Gambella ATVET

Chan Lam Development Agent Gambella

Ato Sileshi Jebessa Bureau Head Harari

Ato Abebe Diriba Regional Extension Head Oromia

Dr. Assefa Taa Regional Head, Research Oromia

Ato Deyfellahbin Hussien Development Agent Oromia

Ato Robe Hailu Development Agent Oromia

Ms. Shitaye Dechu Development Agent Oromia

Ato Hussen Mohammed Abubaker Development Agent Oromia

Ato Taha Mume Research- Oromia Oromia

Ato Mesegana Lelisa Expert-crops Oromia

Ato Derebe Deboch Development Agent SNNP

Ato Alazar Yacob Development Agent SNNP

Ato Assefa Becharie Development Agent SNNP

Ato Nurdin Mohamed Woreda head SNNP

Dr. Daniel Dauro Regional Head, Research SNNP

.
Name Position Affiliation

Ato Fetene Abeba ATVET Head SNNP (Dilla ATVET)

Ato Simachew Chekol Expert SNNP BOARD

Abdi Salin Ahemed Rep Ato Isse Development Agent Somali

Abdi

Ato Muhadin Mohamed ATVET Head Somali (Gode ATVET)

Omar Abdi Extension Head Somali Livestock Crop & Rural Dev.
Bureau

Wzo. Selamawit Taddelle Development Agent Tigray

Ato Mekonnen Teferi Woreda head Tigray

Ms. Alemnesh Hadgu Expert-NRM Tigray

Ato Alemberhan Harifeyo Development Agent Tigray (Atsibi Woreda)

Ato Feseha Bezabeh Extension Head Tigray BOARD

.
APPENDIX H: Stakeholder and expert input detail

Note to the reader: As mentioned in the full text of the report, stakeholders and
experts on Ethiopian extension played a critical role in identifying key
constraints that face the extension system and developing the overall set of
recommendations. Interim drafts of this report were also reviewed in detail by
stakeholders and experts. This appendix section captures some of the main
themes that were brought up in stakeholder meetings and were subsequently
incorporated into the overall report findings and recommendations.

LINKAGES AND ENABLING ENVIRONMENT

• There should be more focus on how the extension sub-system relates to and
integrates with other sub-systems in the agricultural and education systems.
• Overall enabling environment is one of the most critical issues- extension does
not operate in a vacuum. Seed system and markets are huge constraints right
now- without fixing these, the extension system will remain unable to meet the
needs of farmers. We should look at the overall enabling environment and how
it might strengthen linkages.
• We need to draw out ways to enhance the roles of other players, such as farmer
organizations and the private sector

SUSTAINABILITY
• The report should look at trade-offs within the system and financial
sustainability in terms of cost. The presentation is focused onto opportunities of
investment without critical analysis of the cost of the existing one. We need
more data on effectiveness of resource allocation.
• Be clear if we are trying to strengthen what is existing, or proposing something
different for the extension system.
• Give some indication of how to prioritize recommendation areas.
• Income generation and learning do not have any conflict; they go together.
There should be different departments: fattening, irrigation, poultry etc.

APPROACH & METHODS

• The report should not continue the tradition of focusing only on crop extension,
leaving out livestock, non-cereal crops, irrigation, women farmers, and
pastoralists.
• We should take a look at other extension providers (e.g. NGOs), other countries
(e.g. India), and alternate methods; there are opportunities to draw lessons from
others.
• We cannot neglect productivity issues completely for market orientation in
extension
• Diversification is critical

FIELD EXTENSION SYSTEM AND TRAINING

.
• The “woreda resource center” is a good idea but should be called “woreda
information or knowledge center.” We need more resources at kebele level too.
• DAs should be generalists, but there should be a mechanism for calling
specialist SMSs or allowing for short-term training for specialization. But in
terms of transferring knowledge you should specialize on some skills.
• FTCs are backbone of agricultural development and should be developed more
for training

STAFF PERFORMANCE
• The culture of performance and accountability needs to be improved at all levels
of extension, not just FTCs
• Need more focus on quality of ATVET students and instructors
• Need to improve communication of DAs
• Measurement criteria should be taken from impact of DA—farmers should
participate in measuring the DAs- they should be satisfied with service
• DAs should be transferrable/promotable to the woreda, zone, and even regional
level
• Best incentive staff is education-this should be shortened

GENERALIST VS SPECIALIST DA ROLE

• Stakeholder meetings had much dialogue on DA as generalist versus specialist.
Adama meeting participants were nearly unanimous in calling for generalist
DAs
• Most DAs required to answer broad array of questions from farmers, not just in
their specialist areas; DAs in the field today need remedial or in-service training
courses on other topics, based on the needs of farmers