TY - JOUR
T1 - Bottom-Up Approaches and Decentralized Extension Structures for Improving Access to and Quality of Extension Services and Technology Adoption
T2 - Multi-level Analysis from Malawi
AU - Ragasa, Catherine
AU - Alvarez-Mingote, Cristina
AU - McNamara, Paul
N1 - This study was funded by the Government of Flanders, through the Flanders-Malawi Country Strategy Paper for International Cooperation, and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), through the Strengthening Agricultural and Nutrition (SANE) Activity.
After a decade since they were first established, these decentralized structures are not seen favorably, and several studies have pointed to several weaknesses and challenges in their functioning (MEAS ; Masangano and Mthinda ; Chowa et al. ). These weaknesses are summarized as (1) lack of leadership and ownership of the processes, (2) unclear mandates and institutional arrangements in the implementation guide, (3) limited technical and financial support, and (4) weak link to research and national policy processes and coordinating structures (MEAS ; Masangano and Mthinda ; Chowa et al. ; Ragasa and Mthinda ). With funding through the Malawi Agricultural Sector Wide Approach\u2014Support Project (ASWAp-SP) and the Sustainable Agricultural Production Programme (SAPP), starting in 2014, and recently through the Strengthening Agriculture and Nutrition Extension (SANE) project starting in 2015, these structures have been supported and somehow strengthened. Project documents by SANE (MaFAAS, ) and preliminary fieldwork conducted by this paper\u2019s authors has painted a more positive outlook on these structures and a substantial variation and diverse experiences throughout Malawi in their activity levels. As a result, the present study was initiated to (1) characterize these platforms\u2014how they are structured, how they function, and the nature and type of their activities; (2) explain why these structures are more active in some areas than in others by looking at factors that affect the formation of strong structures; and (3) evaluate whether these panels and committees make positive contributions in their communities, using both qualitative evidence (narratives from communities) and quantitative evidence (average treatment effects using outcome indicators including extension service access, technology adoption, productivity, and food security).
PY - 2024/10
Y1 - 2024/10
N2 - This paper looks at village agriculture committees, model villages, and stakeholder panels at various levels as participatory and decentralized structures for improving demand articulation and accountability in agricultural extension service provision in Malawi. It uses various datasets including nationally representative household and community surveys, a survey of service providers, a survey of representatives from the various structures, focus group discussions, and key informant interviews. It employs various estimation methods including matching techniques, matching plus regression adjustments, and an instrumental variables approach. Results show diverse experiences and functionality of these structures. Contrary to earlier reports, most of these structures are active, except for district stakeholder panels (DSPs), of which only about a quarter are active. Similarly, most of them provide a platform for discussion and feedback on service providers and the quality of their advice, except for DSPs. However, most structures were given poor ratings in terms of their responsiveness to the concerns and issues raised. Household participation in village development or agriculture committees is strongly associated with better household outcome indicators. These village committees, if they are active and responsive to farmers’ expressed concerns and needs, can contribute to better community-level outcomes. Results show that these village-level structures matter and that strengthening them is key to addressing their long-term functionality. On the other hand, a model village concept that focuses on an integrated approach to solving communities’ challenges is not associated with improved community outcome indicators; therefore, its implementation should be reviewed and improved to contribute to development outcomes.
AB - This paper looks at village agriculture committees, model villages, and stakeholder panels at various levels as participatory and decentralized structures for improving demand articulation and accountability in agricultural extension service provision in Malawi. It uses various datasets including nationally representative household and community surveys, a survey of service providers, a survey of representatives from the various structures, focus group discussions, and key informant interviews. It employs various estimation methods including matching techniques, matching plus regression adjustments, and an instrumental variables approach. Results show diverse experiences and functionality of these structures. Contrary to earlier reports, most of these structures are active, except for district stakeholder panels (DSPs), of which only about a quarter are active. Similarly, most of them provide a platform for discussion and feedback on service providers and the quality of their advice, except for DSPs. However, most structures were given poor ratings in terms of their responsiveness to the concerns and issues raised. Household participation in village development or agriculture committees is strongly associated with better household outcome indicators. These village committees, if they are active and responsive to farmers’ expressed concerns and needs, can contribute to better community-level outcomes. Results show that these village-level structures matter and that strengthening them is key to addressing their long-term functionality. On the other hand, a model village concept that focuses on an integrated approach to solving communities’ challenges is not associated with improved community outcome indicators; therefore, its implementation should be reviewed and improved to contribute to development outcomes.
KW - Agricultural information
KW - Community development
KW - Decentralization
KW - Extension services
KW - Multistakeholder platform
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85190668569&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85190668569&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1057/s41287-024-00627-y
DO - 10.1057/s41287-024-00627-y
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85190668569
SN - 0957-8811
VL - 36
SP - 1093
EP - 1146
JO - European Journal of Development Research
JF - European Journal of Development Research
IS - 5
ER -