Question 2 (opens 14 Nov.)

While it’s true that knowledge management (KM) is applicable to the farmer sectors and almost all types of industry sectors, of equal importance is Change management or better called transition management (TM), Kelly.

I purposely buy the idea brought up by Peter on “embracing” ICT. This word sounds exactly what transition management is all about. Change is such a strong word to use here because it connotes result whereas transition is a subtle word which focuses more on the process.  Knowing and using and prioritizing procurement of ICT gadgets, manipulating or having technical knowledge--all these should be done in a slow but sure manner. Call this transition management by such terms as “shifting  gear” or “paradigm shift” but I really subscribe to the idea that incorporating the use of ICTs should not be done hastily. ( I guess the teacher in me is starting to work again, at this point) The psychology of the learners, in this case the farmers, or the fishermen, etc. should be one major consideration here.  As in any transition management, the move should start  from the individual, then to the group, next to the organization  proceeding to the environmental.

Hello Bry, Peter, Fr. Narcisso, Koy, Kelly, and Dolores,

Reading your posts, these signify that ICT needs other fields of expertise.  Although we are talking here of agriculture, producer organizations in relation to ICT, and what would be the priority to invest in ICT by the producers organizations, I am thinking about that the  producer organizations not only need of ICT to meet the goal of tasks, but also requiring multi areas and degrees of professions.  The same as ICT cannot functions completely without  other interrelated knowledge of diverse professions, such as managers, agriculturists, weather viewers and forecasters, finance, accounting, and marketing even sociogists, researchers, and moralists.  I think it is in these several interconnected disciplines that ICT can be able to fully function professionaly and successfully.  So you are right in your critical opinion that education is needed, whether is formal or non-formal education.  Building human capitals academically, morally, and religiously there is no doubt that goals of agricultural development in line with ICT can easily be achieved either owned by government projects or private sectors.  Hence ICT in this perspective is merely one effective component in building the agricultural world, but is now becoming a great device to speed up the works and tasks of agriculture.  As we cannot undervalue the importance of education, we cannot also do but value the fast movement of ICT's development in today's modern age.  What I am trying to stress here is that ICT cannot stand alone; it is interconnected to other concentrations of studies.  Thus, what would be the priority I should say financial is the primary imporant, followed of course by the study of the location (simple research) in order to identify the demands and needs of the target beneficiaries and to be able to design a kind of project of investment that addresses the needs, definitely intellectual resources and technical manpowers are also needed within both internal and extenal environments, plus above all the on-going social and community development, because the success of such investment rely also on the response, cooperation, and support of the target beneficiaries. 

Dear Eva,

I agree with your thinging. Purpose of ICT shoud be to connect different fields of interest not working individually.

Why not use some comprehensive solution possibly with option to use on smartphones?

With such a solution to run farm business all involved parties (i.e. farmers, agricultural experts, veterinary experts, government, taxing service) would get an info of their interest about farm. Such a solution would minimize administrative work for farmers and give them posibility to be able to access much needed info on the spot.

Today famers no matter where cope with load of work and lack of funds.

It is true, that this type of infrastructure would mean high investment costs, but by combining different field of experts, costs could be spreaded between them which would mean lower investment costs for farmers.

Learning process would aslo be needed. But by convincing farmers and others, that all participants would really benefint from this (best solution is by constructing a good pilot project), I believe that they would be very willing to participate.

Regards, Gasper

Hi, Gasper and all!

I thought my opinion would not find relevant means to connect, I was wondering if I went beyond the bordiers of our #2 discussions.  It is true Gasper, if I put this way my own limited reflection as when we look on the priority areas that producer organizations should invest with regards to ICT in the Philippines, in addition to my previous post, yes the Philippines is truly an agricultural country and every Filipino is proud of it.  In this context, there is no doubt that agricultural and ICT can go far beyond success once there is sufficient funding, equipped knowledge in general or in specific technigues on management.  However, considering the situation of agriculture in the country in this age, where there are those locations and regions that infrastructures, roads and means of transportation are still on the way to development, if I put myselft in the position of the producer organizations in the private or business sector, I might be thinking hundredfold reflections before making and prioritizing decision.  Yes Gasper, meaning a depth feasibility of study must be done regarding the external environment that might certainly affect the investment.  Certainly, the capacity of my internal resources both human and materials towards the needs and demands has to be put into consideration.  So why not prioritizing an investment on planning and assessment on the particular location (pilot area) and considering the situation of the area is greatly important, as some of us already mentioned, such as mapping, observation and review, emersion and identification of the identifiable kinds of ICT applicable to be invested in that area in order to address the demands and needs.  

Granting I have the fund and knowledge, I will not lose my effort, time, and investment for nothing.  Part of the plan maybe the timeframe, kind of project, and for whom and what would be the aim which I am trying to attain, it depends on the goals and objectives, for instance is this for gaining profit or for community service?  If I will be the investor, in the case for ICT, belong to private or business; government or owners of the land, or even funding agencies, I will  invest my resources that will end progress in return.  That is why, in the initial part, which some of us already stated, such study of the location could be the priority and considering the possible resources.  

I think this is necessary.  So, it depends on the area, location is indeed imperative when we think of investing ICT in the agricultural condition of the Philippines.  Some of us are correct in our reflection that investing ICT vary on the context.  If we are trying to invest ICT on the frontiers and develop agricultural zone, connection, electricity and accessibility are available then we can answer the question that pertains to the investment of equipment and specific technical knowledge on it.  On the other hand, if we reflect on the underdeveloped condition of agricultural reality of the country, which is still on the way, we can only adapt to the capacity of people and place.  Yes, Sir Sandy is correct, capacity building, then adjusting to the situation for the meantime.  What would be other solutions?  Yes, it is really to augment funds and resources for the initial and sustainability.  This would entail  global and communinal supports and collaborations surely, but another question is how long would it be in our case to be dependent in terms of sourcing funds particularly in the case of the socio-economic underpriviledge? Yes, #3 question is now opening our dynamic and brilliant minds to find more answers.  

Thus, to be realistic in the investment whether it is in the ICT or not, and let us put it in the ICT's perspective in relation to agriculture, planning and decision making are imperative.  It calls for re-integration process.  Thank you.

I agree with you Peter. ICT should be about empowerment of the members of the organization. Now how to do?

Farmers must be educated (certainly yes) and tehy need capacity building. At the same time how can ICT value what farmers already know? What farmers want ? How can ICT build on existing farmers knowledge to have it recognised. 

Farmers when organized, have goals and objectives they want to acheive. The beauty of ICT is that it may be complex technology but most often easy to use technology. Look at the celle phone or the computers. 

How can ICT help farmers get organized and empowered to have their voice heard or to negotiate contracts, collectively so their bargaining power is bigger than if they negotiate on an individual basis?

Hello Pierre

Thank you for your reply. I think that you raise an interesting point: At the same time how can ICT value what farmers already know?

I believe that not many posters have touched on this issue, and have looked at ICT as the delvery system of some better "outside" or external solution. I think that the social dimesion of incorporating ICT has been somewhat overlooked in the our discussions. 

I believe that without recognizing the value of the farmers knowledge and local traditions, any ICt project will be at best slowed, and at worst, ignored. I read with some dismay the use of the term, "techo-peasant", which I found to be quite derogatory. How can something that does not respect the people that are involved being in any empowering.

So I turn back to your querstion: 

At the same time how can ICT value what farmers already know?

I think that this is a quite a simple matter (at least in theory) but it is simply to involve the farmers at every step of the process. Farmers can be the "players" in video, the voices in broadcasts. Their knowlegde can be shared with other farmers in addition to the "outside" knowledge so that this is a cooperative effort which while also leading to a wider education and knowlwedge platform, will also empower the farmers because they are part of a joint solution top the challenges of their locale.

++++++++++++++++

Once farmers get more control over ICT, I think it can be an effective tool of cutting out the middleman. If farmers are able to directly discuss and negotiate prices using ICT (again further empowerment), then they may be able to get better pricing, particularly on items that may be less susceptible to market fluctuations (such as farm equipment).

Naturally, the local knowledge leading to cooperative purchases would be essential (and further empowering) in determining what was needed and what prices the cooperatives could manage. Management of producer groups could be further democratized by ICT.

Regards,

Peter

ICT adoption is influenced by factors like: location, size and income level of the operation, access to market, insertion to the production chain, technological level and the age and education of the producers. Thus, to take advantage of ICT and to reverse asymmetrical development in agricultural production; measures such as developing mechanisms on the exchange of regional experiences (best practices) like facilitating access of farmers to ICT using telecentres, computer supply and connectivity programs for rural school, motivational and educational strategies aimed at overcoming resistance, demonstrating the usefulness of the technologies and developing digital skills are needed.  For virtual capacity, implementing data flatforms and portals are recommended. With the assumption that connectivity will be supplied by the National Telecommunications Office, efforts should be focused on motivating farmers to adopt ICTs in management and production. It is very important that policies should be technically and financially feasible and sustainable and take into account the specific characteristics of the production systems, technological evolution and the range of interactions with the competitive, institutional and social environment should be in place. – Monica Rodrigues, Economic Affairs Officer, ECLAC   http://www.eclac.cl/socinfo/noticias/paginas/3/44983/newsletter18ENG.pdf

The Department of Budget and Management in cooperation with the Department of the Interior and Local Government, Department of Agriculture, Department of Agrarian Reform, National Anti-Poverty Commission and the National Statistics Office spearheaded the Registry System for Basic Sectors in Agriculture (RSBSA) an important endeavor by the Good Governance and Anti-Corruption Cluster headed by His Excellency President Benigno S. Aquino III.  This is in response to the need for a comprehensive and systematic information system that caters to the various data and information needs of economic development, planners, policymakers, and project implementors. RSBSA uses ICT, filled-up forms are scanned and stored in database.

Until now, the discussion on question 2 is mainly on ICT products needed to improve agriculture, market access etc..

If we look at the question from the point of view of a rural producer organization leader, we may find that leaders may be interested in ICT products to help them better manage their organizations for their organizations to be more efficient in delivering services demanded by members.

Leaders have access to information (policy, market opportunities etc..) and knowledge that they want to share with members and other leaders, and they may want to hear from each other as well. Organizing meeting is costly and time consuming in particular in rural areas. What ICT technology can help producer organization leaders share information with other leaders and members and receive feedback from them? Leader may want ICT product them solve conflict between members or between their organization and traders or Government institutions. Leader may want ICT products to help them have members voice heard by Government, by consumers, by traders or food industries etc. . What ICT instrument exist for that? Leader may want to have ICT products to help them negotiate (as an organization not as an individual) with traders and or government officials, etc. .

When we look at the web site of the Conseil National de Concertation des Ruraux in Senegal (http://www.cncr.org), we can see that their site is to share information about who they are, what they do etc.. When I was working with them, they wanted to develop a CNCR intranet to better connect with their regional and grass root member organizations.  I don't know if they have their intranet today.

What kind of ICT products can help people leaving in rural areas, better connect between themselves and their leaders when distance between people is important, roads are not good, services are not always efficient, etc.. The ICT technology must be cheap, easy to operate (which does not mean not complex, cf. the cell phone or computers), robust, reliable etc… 

Pierre

Sir Pierre, 

Just a little turn around in ICT. 

It is widely acknowledged (in academics and in practice) that radio as an ICT product is still an effective medium to connect people even with geographic distances.  Producer organizations can still and should take advantage of this medium despite the popularity of internet and mobile phones (which also have their limitations in rural areas where power and connection signal can be irregular or poorly accessed) because farmers still regard radio as their source of information.

The operation of local radio networks would serve the purpose of reaching the farmers locate, match their produce with the market demands, and perhaps, invite exchange of information through interactive/participative programs aired over the radio.

Dear Sansu

You are very right, radio is a remarquable instrument to connect rural people together and a lot of producer organization try to use radio for that purpose. They are often facing difficulties to obtain the license to have a local radio  and radio may be costly to run. 

Are you or anyone aware of easy radio technology that farmers organizations could run without having to have a studio etc...???