Question 3 (opens 19 Nov.)

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_e...

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)!