Question 3: What should be the role of the public sector in supporting producer organizations' uptake of ICT?
To receive notifications of new posts in this forum, or to post a reply directly from your email, you need to simply click under "Account" > "Notifications" > "Create a new subscription" > "Content type" > "Forum topic". For any questions contact [email protected]
Thanks Riikka for your summary.
Following the discussion, my impression is that there is no doubt in anyone’s mind that the public sector can do so much to support the producer organization’s uptake of ICT. Ideas ranging from infrastructure to legislation, funding to education, etc. have been identified as excellent ways for the public sector, particularly the government, to provide assistance to producer organizations, as far as ICT is concerned.
Allow me to emphasize the importance of collaboration between the public sector and producer organizations, knowing very well that each one needs the other to succeed in their respective and also common endeavors. Still, there are things in the area of ICT which can be best done by the public sector only, particularly the government, owing to its extensive reach and extent of resources. Thus, the government could put up national and regional agencies specializing in information that will link up producer organizations with academia (for research), relevant private sectors (for funding and project partnership), and the rest of the civil society. Now, some of us might point out that this is already being done in some countries, which is excellent. Nevertheless, such collaboration between the public sector and producer organizations must come with clear agenda and sound strategy, not to mention a system of accountability, knowing as we do that corruption, red tapes and the likes could easily creep in and compromise a good ICT project.
The issue raised by Peter is to me valid. Indeed, “how to get things done?”
My take is that, as we discuss the ‘what and how’ of public sector’s role in supporting producer organizations on ICT, the ‘whys and wherefores’ should also be spelled out. The inherent need to (re)visit and make explicit the rationale of the public sector’s engagement with producer organizations must be seriously considered, if only to give all concerned parties a clear idea of what kind of support to expect from the public sector, as opposed to what the producer organizations actually need in their uptake of ICT.
Moreoever, the collaboration between the public sector and the producer organizations must be done in the spirit of dialogue, transparency, and, again, accountability. Short of these conditions, any ICT undertaking by the public sector purportedly to assist producer organizations could potentially become ‘white elephants’. In other words, besides infrastructure, funding, knowledge, expertise, etc., the public sector must exhibit integrity and moral leadership through appropriate legislations and credible and just implementation of policies.
Hi Riikha! Thanks for your summary. May I then, add these very appropriate ideas which I got from this site:http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library/51025/ZipAgExtension1/ag_…
I supposed these ideas are worth considering in as much as the role of the public sector and ICTs among POs are concerned.
1. Delivery of extension and information services to producers
· A mature extension system should be characterized by a pluralistic system of extensionfunders and service providers. However, the public sector must continue to be a major player, both in funding and coordinating operations.
2. New funding resources and mechanism to allocate public funds
· Public sector financing and cost sharing should focus on poverty reduction and this must be the real focus of public funding whether services are provided by public employees or contracted out to private organizations
3. A reformulated role for the public sector to support pro-poor extension
· A need for national vision and strategy for assuring and
enhancing quality of services and decentralizing program planning
and implementation are called for in here. (And may I add, the use of
mother-tongue based instruction among farmers in all attempt at
educating/informing them.)
4. Building POs capacity, empowering users, expanding pool of qualified service
providers and the use of new information and communication technology
· All these require links with, and modernization of, the agricultural
education system.
Thanks Dolores - good points, and indeed very much along 'agreed' role for public sector supporting poor, POs etc in capacity and services.
Hi all,
At the national level, there is resounding agreement that the role of the public sector is to create an enabling environment for the uptake of ICT by producer organizations - whether this be through policies, fiscal measures or market incentives that encourage investments in infrastructure. On a political level, the recognition of ICT as public goods or goods in the service of the public will provide the right framework which could facilitate the delivery of ICT to the smallholder farmers, among other normally marginalized sectors.
At the intergovernmental level, multilateral agreements frequently have provisions for capacity building via technology transfer or funding support. Some of these happen as North-South or South-South cooperation initiatives. National governments, particularly from developing countries, should (as they presently do) actively push for such international support as this could help enable them to do capacity building - infrastructure, equipment, skills - in their respective countries and eventually improve on the uptake of ICT by producer organizations.
Food security is a high political agenda at the intergovernmental level - it is a cross-cutting issue that traverses discussions on climate change, humanitarian conflicts, ecosystems management, women, children, etc. As such, there is opportunity for national governments to engage and aim for multilateral funding or assistance to be channeled to ICT investments in support of marginalized sectors such as the producer organizations.
This is why a robust base of evidence (research on impact of ICT on POs or farmers' livelihoods, data base of case studies) that justifies why ICT use should be scaled up in the smallholder farmer sector should be built and presented as inputs to policy-level discussions or multilateral negotiations so the case for greater international cooperation for ICT in rural communities e.g. producer organization can be further encouraged.
HI Dolly,
can I add, aside from setting aside public funds for producer organization's needs, the public sector can also provide technical assistance in terms of capacitating members of producer organizations without, or should a I, with a very least amount of budget involved?
Just like what we do with capacitating parents in the barangay level, we teach them livelihood skills and the budget we spend is very minimal for the ingredients and supplies to be used during the training, which, we hope they would internalize and start a small business on their own.
In terms of producer organizations, perhaps TESDA or other government agencies with the know-how in ICT can provide free training to members of POs which they can apply back in their organization.
The public sector, along with development agencies, academic institutions, foundations, private sector, end-users, and nongovernmental organizations, plays an important role as one of the ICTD actors particularly in supporting producer organizations’ uptake of ICT.
ICT Infrastructure—include ICT infrastructure especially for rural areas as part of the national infrastructure planning and programs. Prioritizing agriculture and rural viability is a sustainable solution to the present need for ensured food security/quality, and the urgent need to lessen/minimize environmental abuse.
Coordination/Collaboration/Partnership— identify beneficial collaborations across government agencies/ ICTD actors and provide coordination for multi-agency projects (e.g. public-private partnerships, PPP,— putting into effect of enabling guidelines/regulations; funding/subsidies to ICT providers— mobile telephony providing market access of farmers to real time information and marketing alternatives)
Information Access/Open Content— take an active role in opening access to knowledge and information and in enhancing the use of open-source technology (collect, document, and disseminate), in offering and providing integrated platforms for IKM that will encourage individuals, groups and organizations utilizing ICT to become active creators and producers of information.
The normal tendency of public sector is to cooperate with a donor agency or a producer organization in helping out the agricultural community. This is just my opinion but I feel that many times we cannot have optimized cooperation because of differences of time, knowledge/specialty, and sometimes differences of opinions, beliefs, and strategies in both sides of the equation (public vis-a-vis private).
However, when the public sector effects genuine coordination in terms of efforts, of schedules, of needs and aid between the producer organization and the agricultural community then we definitely will see a more selfless public sector that might not get anything back in return from the producer org but will surely be able to ensure the correct type of help/aid/training to the target community.
I see the point of Fr. Ravasco. Coordination is the key to empower producer organization. This is especially true since the extension delivery has been devolved to local government units with the enactment of the Local Government Code of 1991. Producer organizations should be able to generate their own resources using the strategies thay see fit. If a producer organization realized that embracing ICT is the most effective strategy to reach its goals and objectives, then it should adopt ICT because it saw the advantages of pursuing it and not because a certain government agency prodded it to adopt ICT.
HI Fr G,
Earlier, in reponse to rtdjou's post, I just ennumerated various government agencies which can provide support or help out producer organizations according to their needs.
Reading your post, i can't help but share our experience (not in terms of coordinating/cooperating with producer organizations) with other government agencies, Non-government agencies, LGUs, the private sector, academe, and even media groups, in terms of coordination and cooperation with private sector.
Yes, there may be differences in opinions, knowledge, specialty, etc., but as long as the cluster groups are working towards achieving a common goal -- for the good and benefit of the target group -- then, there must be some ways to make these differences work in harmony just to reach/achieve that goal.
This is especially true when there is donor agency to provide funds to implement specific projects where there is public-private partneship, because the government agencies involved in the same project will have extra funds apart from their respective budget that can be spent for that public-private-donor agency collaboration, not just superficial coordination - cooperation tag, but true collaboration, where the wheel of coordination and cooperation can run more smoothly and efficiently.
One of the areas in which the public sector should support is the empowerment of producer organization by ensuring that are knowledgeabe in the applications of ICT in their organizations.
In the Philippines, the Department of Agriculture - Agricultural Training Institute has embraced ICT in the delivery of extension services which in turn helped entice and prod farmers to come to ATI. The ATI currently maintains an e-learning facility for famers as well as a Farmers' Contact Center which is accesible via phone, SMS and email.
Through ICT, ATI is empowering farmer organizations. ATI can leapfrog producer organizations uptake of ICT for development by conducting e-learning sessions which will discuss the applications of ICT in various areas of farming (production, processing, marketing, farm business accounting and human resource development)!
Hi Mike,
I agree that the public sector should empower the farmers. I would like to add to your example the Philippine Rice Research Institute's Pinoy Rice Knowledge Bank. They have a system called PalayCheck that presents the best key technology and management practices in rice crop management.
Regards,
Harv
This is a very helpful information. Certainly, government agencies, particularly the Department of Agriculture and its sub-units, need to embrace ICT in extension services and thus conduct ICT training programs for producer organizations.
Besides this government-centered training approach though, I wonder whether it would be a feasible idea for the government to create a mandate for ICT training institutions to design academic programs that are specifically meant for farmers and producer organizations, coupled with scholarship. There would be complications and issues to be resolved of course, foremost among them woud be the availability of farmers. Still, when pursued and given a try, the benefits farmers would get from a formal ICT training could be myriad.
The public sector offers multifarious services to the producer organizations. These producer organizations are considered as partners. Take the case of the Department of Agriculture (DA). DA does not give any assistance or interventions to individual farmers but to the producer organizations. In its bid to modernize the agriculture sector and for the agriculture sector to be sustainable and competitive, the following support are being given to the producer organizations:
1. Production support services - under this, farmers are provided with quality planting materials through community seed banking and technology demonstrations in order to increase production.
2. Market support services - services include price information, market matching, provision of food terminals, and holding of trade fairs and exhibits.
3. Credit facilitation services - producer organizations are assisted in the preparation of their feasibility studies/projects proposals for sourcing of funds from financing institutions; credit linkage, etc.
4. Irrigation services - provision of irirgation services through rehabilitation of irrigation systems such as small water impounding dams, small farm reservoir, etc.
5. Infrastructure projects and postharvest facilities - include farm-to-market road rehabilitation, establishment of warehouse, rice processing complex, corn central, flatbed dryers, etc. These are not dole-outs but on a counterparting scheme, farmer-beneficiaries putting up a certain per cent as their counterpart (ex. - cost sharing arrangement: 85% DA; 15% - proponent)
6. Extension support, education and training services - include school-on-the-air, training of members of the producer organizations as local farmer technicians to augment the extension workers in the locality, Farmers Field School, social mobilization and preparation, and provision of IEC materials.
7. Research and development - the banner program is the community-based participatory action research (CPAR) wherein the producer organization members are being trained as researchers. This is in partnership with the LGUs and CSOs. Farm inputs are being provided by DA while LGU/producer organizations provide 20% equity as part of the project cost. Members are required to repay what they have received but the repayment (60%) will be made to the organization not to DA. The objective of CPAR is to increase farmers' productivity and income through integrated farming system and promote people empowerment.
8. Information support services - provision of IEC materials, conduct of radio programs, TV guestings, establishment of Barangay Agricultural Information Center (BAIC) in partnership with the community, utilization of quad media (print, radio, TV, internet) in disseminating information on agriculture matters, technology updates, research breakthroughs, etc. Partnership with the media has been forged through the establishment of the agency Press Corp. Information caravans are also being held bringing the services closer to the grassroots.
9. Advocacy, policy and planning - capacitating LGUs to become effective planners, conduct of consultations with CSOs/POs/NGOs/private sector as participants, providing ICT needs to DA partners through its GIS laboratory, conduct of ICT training on geotagging; and, maintenance of agency website to promote transparency, and accountability. Through DA website, producer organizations may access agricultural information.
The major strategy in implementing all these is through public-private partnership.
Hi rtdjoy,
I would just like to provide concrete examples on the public-private partnership for the producer organizations in the following areas:
Production support services - maybe the DA can partner with various suppliers who belong to the private sector in terms of providing both farming equipments and agricultural supplies, among others.
Market support services - in partnership with DA and DTI, traders and producer organizations can be matched for wider and more effective trading of produce
Credit facilitation services - The Land Bank of the Philippines and credit cooperatives to facilitate the lending/loan programs which the producer organizations can avail of.
Infrastructure projects and postharvest facilities - in partnership or collaboration with DPWH and the LGUs in mappingout farm-to-market roads
Extension support, education and training services - perhaps, TESDA can be tapped here, as this is the government agency which takes care of low-cost skills/training programs
Research and development - can the DA collaborate with PIDS, the Academe, DBP among other institutions to support R&D on agricultural needs/requirements?
Information support services - in tandem with the government's stations PTV4 and Phil. Information Agency, along with other national agencies which have their own regular media group promoting the agency's programs esp. on food production and food security, such as National Nutrition Council, DA, to mention a few
Advocacy, policy and planning - again, PIA along with other agencies which run their own media groups, NEDA, PIDS, etc.
Thus, public-private partnership is really in existence as various government agencies belonging to different cluster groups which hold regular consultation meetings with the President.
Question 3: What should be the role of the public sector in supporting producer organizations' uptake of ICT?
Let me share this with all of you-
First, Philippines is an agricultural and a calamity-prone country. It is the sector of the government that primarily provides agricultural food for the people. It is encompassing therefore, that the government should invest more in improving this sector of our government.
Second, we have a downward trend in the number of enrolees and graduates in the country, perhaps because of the impression that agriculture connotes farming and parents who are farmers would rather see their children with white collar jobs than to see them in the farm.
Third, offices in Region I and perhaps in other regions like Department of Agriculture (DA), Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), Bureau of Fisheries (BFAR) and in the Local Government Units have been running out of experts not only in agriculture but also in fisheries. How could we be assured support from the public if they are just few takers of the program or meager number who appreciate the agriculture program?
This is one of reasons why the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) issued CHED Memorandum Order 32, s. 2011 to put on moratorium the opening of all undergraduate and graduate programs in Business Administration, Nursing, Teacher Education, Hotel and Restaurant Management and Information Technology Education, effective School Year 2011-2012 to give way to the undersubscribed programs, where one of which is the Agriculture program.
As an initiative, CHED Region I, in one of the activities we conducted on agriculture,we organized an association, conducted a Student Congress, held Trade Fair in collaboration with the DA, DENR,BFAR and DOLE all in Region I. Recently, we were able to produce a 7th placer in the region, which is a history to the institution. Further, based on the monitoring activity conducted recently by the joint team, CHED and PRC with two (2) institutions offering the agriculture program, their enrollment increased and their performance rating in the recent board exam has gone beyond the national passing rate.
How can we have the public support to the producer organization’s uptake of ICT if our agriculture sector is seemingly "weak"?
- Starting from the bottom, we have to intensify advertising the agriculture program so as to increase the number of takers. From here, public would appreciate the program. (INFORMATION DISSEMINATION/IEC)
- Collaboration of the different concerned agencies like DENR, DA, BFAR, DOLE, etc. could help strengthen the program by conducting activities, trainings, etc. (LINKAGING)
- There is a need to revise/enhance the curriculum on agriculture to integrate further knowledge and application of ICT since the Policies and Standards for said Bachelor of Science in Agriculture program (CHED Memorandum Order No. 14, s. 2008) only requires, as a minimum requirement , 1 subject (3-units) of ICT. This will help students be exposed in the new media technology. This way, their knowledge on ICT could be utilized during their community and extension activities, On-the-Job Trainings (OJT)/practicum and the like. Training of farmers on the use of ICT as part of the activity could be engaged in. (COMMUNITY EXTENSION)
- Once the farmers or stakeholders are ICT equipped, communication with producer organizations could be easily accessed. Public in general could have a ready access on said organzations.(COMMUNICATION)
- Tapping the support of the private enterprise like telecom/ICT companies to get involved (perhaps through sponsorships, provision for gadgets/ICT equipment or trainings) would mean, advertising their products and at the same time getting the farmers be trained on ICT. (INVOLVEMENT OF PRIVATE ENTERPRISE)
- Use of networking like social media to intensify ICT between producer organizations and other stakeholders could be of help like creating an e-Agriculture Group, etc. (NETWORKING)
- The convergence of government and private enterprises (through the use of human, physical, economic resources) to attain public support could help out. (PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP)
The rural information services in China supported by the government has four differnt partnership models. The Association-Cooperation models is one of those.
With support from the government, the Association–Cooperative consists of farmers in an area who are in need or interested in the same types of information. Due to the commonality of interests, they form either a specialized association or a specialized economic cooperative on a voluntarily basis that they then manage.
This type of group centers around one crop or animal or some other commodity in common. The association or cooperative provides members with information services before, during and after the production of a certain type of agricultural product with the intent of improving their production and increasing their income.
Although narrow in focus, the information service covers a range of technical, market and policy issues. Some associations and cooperatives also purchase production materials for members and offer marketing services for farm products.
The updated report on Agricultural Information Services in Rural China is at press, while the previous report can be found at www.fao.org/docrep/007/ad504e/ad504e00.htm
Dear All
We have seen that ICT can help Producer Organizations (PO) better serve their member needs trough improving access to information, access to input and output markets, etc.. ICT can also help PO to have their voice heard.
We have seen the priority areas PO should invest in with regard to ICT.
Now what is it that the Government should do for PO to invest in ICT? Of course training, capacity building. In addition what should the Government do to create a conducive socio-economic environment for PO to invest in ICT. What type of IC infrastructure? What legal environment? Should Government provide subsidies for PO to buy cell phone or to by cell phone contracts? or for PO to have a radio for themsleves? or for PO to produce films, music, video etc. etc.??
Hi sir,
In the Philippines what I know was that, there was an ICT Roadmap Plan of the previous administration, entitled " Empowering a Nation through ICT" if this is followed and implemented I believe the accessibility, availability,interoperability and sustainability of the producers organization will not be a problem.
PO to have a radio for themselves, actually it is quite expensive, from securing permit to operate, building and maintennance of radio station.
Produce films, music and other audio visuals materials are quite feasible with today's technology.
HI abaguilar, thank you for sharing this info with us. I believe a commitment to strengthen the capacity of rural cooperatives and producer organizations, as well as encouraging government to establish favorable policies, legal frameworks and participatory processes to promote growth and sustainability will help.
The weakness of producer organizations is their over-dependence on government or donor support. It is time to identify conditions that will help these member-based organizations to become more self reliant and sustainable business enterprise.
Yes, Ms Fatima, I agree with you that many of the organizations (in our place Albay in particular) are too dependent to the support of the funding organizations, the moment the funding agencies left, the programs or projects being implemented will also stop.
Hello Pierre and Adrian, In addition to your posts, the government can encourage the producer organizations to invest in ICT by ensuring the systematic dissemination of information using ICTs on agriculture, animal husbandry, fisheries, forestry and food, in order to provide ready access to comprehensive, up-to-date and detailed knowledge and information, particularly in rural areas. Public-private partnerships should seek to maximize the use of ICTs as an instrument to improve production (quantity and quality). Work on removing the gender barriers to ICT education and training and promoting equal training opportunities in ICT for women farmers.
What I can suggest in this question is that:
1. Increase in social and institutional capacities
improvement of people's participation in capacity building. mobilizing their own resources that can provide viable and sustainable e services to the producer organizations.provide access to income generating projects
2. Educate producer organizations byproviding trainings and seminars, provide access to computer technology for free in community ecenter.
Fatima and Abaguilar
This is a very interesting discussion. Radio is expensive to run but this is the easiest way for PO to communicate with their members, to communicate prices, knowledge, information etc.. Almost everybody has a small radio and can listen. I have been fascinated to see how farmers in remote areas, are attached to their radio which is a window open to the world (as they say).
Radio are expensive to run thus why not being supported by Government? Then we have the question of PO depending to much on Government resources.
PO dependency on Government resources is absolutely normal when PO are delivering services instead of Government. In the US or Europe, all producer organizations are supported by their Government as cheap vehicules to transfert knowledge and technolgy to farmers.
If Government are serious about PO and increasing farmers production and revenues, reducing poverty etc.. then it is worthwhile for them sponsoring/subsidizing ICT for PO to be more efficient.
What do you think??
Hi Pierre,
Regarding your comment on the government sponsoring/subsidizing ICT for PO, you may want to check the website of the Philippines' Pinoy Rice Knowledge Bank, which provides social mobilization, connectivity, content development and ICT training for farm use.
Harv
Yes, I agree with Sir Pierre when you say radio is expensive to run but the easiest way for PO to communicate mass audiences.In fact it can reach both the literate and illerate. In some areas here in Bicol there were good radio programs funded by the Non-Government organizations,however after quite some time the radio program is discontinued due to non-patronage of listeners. I would say that, Indeed if the government is willing to help the POs they should provide funding assistance and promote the programs and projects being implemented.
Hi Pierre, Fatima, and Abaguilar,
Yes radio program is costly. To familiarize the cost of it as for the fact that some of us realized that radio is still relevant in conveying information and knowledge, let me add some few lines in this discussion that based on my experience when my organization was trying to implement our radio program for the migrants (seafarers and overseas contract workers) and their families, that was 2006, I got an idea that having a slot for radio program is a bit costly. Although that radio program is not directly intended for the farmers, but for the families left behind of seafarers and overseas contract workers, somehow there is still an association and link with our discussion talking with the holistic perspective of agriculture for producing and harvesting, and from manufacturing and marketing. The seafarers and overseas workers with their families belong to the category of workers and consumers in relation to agriculture in this level.
But what I am saying is the cost of radio program in the year 2006 was P10,000 pesos ranging to US#240 -250 per thirty (30) minutes airing the program in Metro Manila. I am not sure what would be the cost in the regional area. Indeed it is still costly to implement radio program as a medium of information dissemination in the part of POs unless they own the radio station or we can go back to the principle of networking and linkages to public sector and affluent business sector. As most of the cases, public sector and established private communication companies have the capacity to establish a radio station.
Hi Pierre, I agree on government support but there has to be commitment. If they use the radio as a tool, there should be some creativity to attract people not just target PO’s but it should somehow create awareness to everyone in order to be effective. Year round announcements would be a nice support from the governement.
Despite the potential benefits of ICTs, farmer organizations are rarely the first to adopt them, given that they normally work in difficult environments with low margins to generate income for their members. To speed the uptake of ICTs it may be appropriate for public agencies to provide funds that can overcome the inertia typical of organizations struggling on a shoestring budget. Supporting a pilot project to demonstrate benefits can be effective. The challenge in most cases, however, is to sustain the use of ICTs after the period of support.
One way of looking at the sustainability issue is to support well-functioning farmer organizations as a public good that merits support from public funds, at least initially. Public funding is justified under the assumption that the public in large would benefit from "cheaper and better" agricultural products. Public-private partnerships are also important, as development in ICT comes largely from the private sector.
http://www.ictinagriculture.org/ictinag/sourceb
www.sljol.info/index.php/JFA/article/download/1799/1511
Jayathilake, H.A.C.K., Jayaweera, B.P.A. and Waidyasekera, E.C.S. ICT Adoption and Its Implications for Agriculture in Sri Lanka.
In a study conducted by Jayathilake, et. al., ICT uptake problems identified are as follows: cost of technology; lack of training; trust level in the ICT system; lack of ICT proficiency; and lack of technological infrastructure.
Adoption is not usually spontaneous, the technology has to be taught and learned - adopted to existing experiences and integrated into production. Batte et. al. (1990), and Warren et.al. (2000), clearly demonstrated that the adoption of ICT is strongly associated with the education level of the farmer and farm size and negative effect of age of the farmers. - Joyce Wendam
The numerous factors that influence IT adoption and use in agricultural organizations can be grouped into five categories: access to IT; demographic; IT training/education; trust; and, time (Kurtenbach and Thompson, 2000). It's clearly demonstrated that the complexity of farm, degree of external support, age, time, experiences, network, availability of information, personality and approach to learning enhanced or diminished a farmer's computer use (Iddings and Apps, 1990).
And also factors like lack of ICT proficiency, lack of ICT benefit awareness, too hard to use, lack of technological infrastructure, cost of technology, trust level in the ICT system, lack of training, system integration and software availability limit the use of ICT by farmers (Taragola and Galb, 2005). - Joyce Wendam
Jayathilake,H.A.C.K., Jayaweera, B.P.A., and Waidyasekera, E.C.S. ICT Adoption and Its Implications for Agriculture in Sri Lanka. Accessed at www.sljol.info/index.php/ JFA/article/download/1799/1511.
Dear Joyce,
Thanks for citing Taragula, Gelb from http://departments.agri.huji.ac.il/economics/gelb-hort-14-2012.pdf
our public domain e-Book ICT ict in Agriculture:Perspectives of Technological Innovation
Would you like to join in our survey
http://departments.agri.huji.ac.il/economics/voet-gelb.pdf
best,
Ehud Gelb
Factors such as social, economic and regulatory environment can influence the success of ICT project implementation.
Public sector can support producers’ organizations and their uptake of ICT by formulating policies which will make way for telecommunications infrastructure and access; strengthen and enable implementation of ICT projects by developing the skills of the extension agents on their role as link between the farmers and research products/technologies ; informed discussion with producers’ organizations on the potential application of ICT; education and digital literacy of producers’ organizations; grant incentives for ICT education and training at all level; provide support/investment on ICT research for ICT development to attract investors and encourage private sectors to innovate; find means for sharing best practices and lessons learned of other organizations; strengthen online security and privacy; encourage private sectors to invest on ICT by giving them affordable financing incentives (tax credits, loans at affordable interest and accelerated appreciation schedules for ICT assets); encourage competition among ICT firms/suppliers – competitive bidding - when procuring ICT products/services and promote public-private partnership for ICT program/projects/undertakings (including research).
ICT as Enablers of Development: A Microsoft Whitepaper 2004
www.itu.int/wsis/stocktaking/docs/activities/1109618441
The role of the public sector is critical in supporting producers' organizations uptake of ICT. True many plans are being implemented and more plans are being mapped out. For me, part of these plans should integrate the role of the public sector to create an enabling environment in order to influence the choices that producers' organizations make in terms of adopting the appropriate ICT that best suits their particular needs. The public sector should help producers' organizations to assess and determine the ICT needs of the organization before deciding on what and when assitance is to be infused. It is crucial to consider the readiness and appropriateness of the producers group to use/apply more advanced ICTs. Many times government intervention schemes and that includes ICTs, which are usually costly, are not successful in achieving the desired results because target beneficiaries are not ready coupled with other concomittant factors like the commitment to sustain the process of intervention even without the puiblic sector's support.
Let me illucidate my point by expressing that if a producer's group is doing well with the use of the radio and or television, the public sector should explore even exploit all possibilities to maximize its use. Then let the public sector take on the role of connecting these producer's group to other producer's groups, the market, and the global world, and develop a feedback mechanism to the producers' group through the medium that they can relate to rather than insisting they use new media which at their level they could not appreciate for one reason or another. I think this will make everybody happy and productive. The producer's group attain what they need and the public sector is serving their purpose.
Reading all your posts, I see that almost all good recommendations and proposals pertaining to the question "what should be the role of the public rector uptake Ict?" have already been specified: However, I have few thoughts to add:
I think that public sector as they belong to the public leading groups and servants of society must primarily keep their duties and positions trustworthy and dependable based on the spirit of service to all people. In appying this consciousness of service to the nation in the agricultural sector and ICT development, all the huge suggestions that mentioned in this forum I believe will be fulfilled.
I am sure that in the government position as public sector knows their role, functions, and works, even before public and private sectors remind them to do, revise, and create new policies of ICT's and agriculture, therefore it is important to keep the essence of calling to be public leaders and servants otherwise no matter how rightful policies and proposal for ICT and agriculture, there would be an struggle to exist, develop, and sustain.
In addition, public sector has all the power and strength to establish, expand, advance, and produce ICT fully bloom once that there is enough budget, and it is the priority and need of the society. The authority, control, influence and supremacy are in their hands for the correct disposal of funds, support, approval, coordination, and collaboration to the private sectors in this case of ICT and agricuture. They have a big role and I am sure that they know their tasks however it is also the duty of the concerned citizens (private sector) to execute their rights and contribute their obligations to make any project for instance on ICT for agriculture.
Things to be considered and to bear in mind that although separate identification and functions but one body for a common task and a communal goal to build a society for ICT and agriculture a better service of advancement for all, not only for individual but collectively.