Sociological dimensions of extension organization : the introduction of the T & V system in India

World Bank Reprint Series: Number 196 Michael Cernea Sociological Dimensions of Extension Organization: The Introduction of the T & V System in India Reprinted with permission from Extension Education and Rural Development, Volume 2. International Experience in Strategies for Planned Change, edited by Bruce R. Crouch and Shankariah Chamala (Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd., 1981), pp. 221-35, 281.  18 Sociological Dimensions of Extension Organization: The Introduction of the T&V System in India Michael C'ernea The curve of sociological interest in agricultural extension systems has been lying low for a while. After the almost worldwide spread of countless research undertakings on 'diffusion of innovation' patterns in the fifties and early sixties, a period of growing criticism and disenchantment followed. The sobering awareness of the limited explanatory power of the sociological diffusionist theories paralleled the accumulating evidence on the low effectiveness of extension services in various countries. However, if the organizational developments and the actual performance of extension services in real life are any indication for the interest which sociologists are likely to take in doing field research and conceptualizing on extension then a new upsurge of sociological interest in this field is predictable. After a number of years when progress in extension has been rather trailing, the increased concern for poverty-orientated rural development strategies and for reaching large numbers of small farmers is again putting extension work to the forefront. Probably the most significant progress in agricultural extension worldwide in the seventies has been the development of a new (or reformed) extension system-called 'the Training and Visits (T&V) Extension System'-and its successful implementation in several very large countries in South Asia and East Asia. The T&V system was developed by an Israeli extension specialist, Daniel Benor, and was first tested in several limited areas in India and Turke8. Its results were very impressive. This led to widespread efforts to adopt the T&V system in much larger areas. For the first time, an identical set of organizational rules and policy principles has been used to develop similar extension organizations in different countries. In several Indian states, in Thailand, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Sri Lanka and other countries the old extension services have been or are being revamped, restructured and expanded along the lines of the T&V system. The World Bank has provided financial assistance for these operations through a series of ongoing agricultural development projects. The new system operates now in areas with several million farm familes and it is expected that the number of extension beneficiaries will increase rapidly in the next few years. These recent developments have not yet captured the attention of many sociologists and other social scientists. In fact, they have occurred rather fast and are little known altogether, let alone studied. In this article I will briefly describe 221  222 EXTENSION EDUCATION AND RURAL DEVELOPMENTr the structure of the T&V extension system, its organizational principles' and what makes it different from other extension arrangements, pointing summarily to its sociological implications. As a case in point, i will refer to India and provide some relevant information about the institutional build-up and the magnitude of the new system in six Indian states-West Bengal, Orissa, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Assam, and Bihar. ORGANIZATIONAL CONSTRAINTS OF EXTENSION SERVICES From a sociological viewpoint, an extension service can be examined as a large- scale J6rnial organization. T'he theory of organizations may help explain and conceptualize the processes involved in the transition from the former to the current extension organization and their different performances. The T&V cxtension system has been developed by Daniel Benor with a clear awareness of the most typical inadequacies embedded in the conventional extension structures. To understand better the organizational novelties in- troduced by the design of the T&V extension system, we should first look briefly to the organizational weaklnesses common to extension services in many developing countries: (1) First, the multipurpose role assigned to the field agent, which causes a distribution of his efforts between agriculture, health, family planning, procurement, collection of statistics etc. As a consequence, 'the extension worker can perform neither his agricultural duties, nor his other duties effectively' (Benor and Harrison, 1977, p. 7). (2) Second, the muiltiple subordination and lack of a single, direct line of administrative control and technical support. The extension worker is often subordinated, in his responsibilities, to several agencies and is not fuill accountable for his time and performance to any one of them exclusively. (3) Third, the iniadequate r atio in extension assistance: field agents have often to cover excessively large jurisdictions, containing 2,000 or more families, which make it impossible to achieve regular contacts between the extension worker and the farmers. (4) Fourth, the lack ofa dcefinite pattern for the agent's field movements among villages and fields and of a time-bound systematic programme of work. This, in combination with what was indicated at points (1) and (2), made possible a high rate of absenteeism. (5) Fifth, the training is mostly preserv'ice training, far apart in time from the delivery of information to the farmer. This exposes the extension message to a high rate of information loss, distortion or inadequacy. (6) Last but not least, lack of eJffctive links with, and feedback to, agricultural resear-c-h activities.  SOCIOLOGICAL DIMENSIONS OF EXTENSION ORGANIZATION 223 Disfunctionalities are fairly frequent in a wide range of extension services in developing countries. They act as the structural causes of a low level of motivation and performance of extenision field staff.2 But, if these organizational maladies are common, then there is a chance that effective organizational remedies, if identified, might have a wide application area. THE DESIGN OF THE T&V SYSTEM The T&V Extension System is a structural reconstruction and development of the existing extension services (or the build-up of a new one, ab oro, when necessary) on the basis of a set of sound and clear-cut organizational principles. The T&V extension organization consists of a structure of tightly interlocking roles and operational rules for each one of its members and uses a basic technique of training and regular visits; it operates along the lines of an extension philosophy stressing simplicity, low-cost improvements, use of available re- sources, and links with research. Defining the basic organizational features of the T&V system, one can almost parallel the analysis of organizationalistructural deficiencies in traditional extension services. Benor and his associates describe these principles as follows: (1) EYclusitvity of Extension. 1 he key actor of the extension organization is the village-level worker and he should devote all his time exclusively to professional agricultural extension work. He should not be assigned regulatory or procurement or administrative or credit collection work. (2) Unique Subordination. Perhaps 'the most essential management principle to be followed is to establish a single line of command from the governmental agency responsible for agriculture to the field-level exten- sion worker'.3 This agency should be, in general, the Agricultural Department, which should have full administrative authority over exten- sion workers. They are thus defined as professional agricultural agents and not as community development agents in general. The unique 'line of command' consists of a hierarchy of roles for agricultural officers and extension agents at different levels. The objective of this structure is to ensure that each level of the organization has a span of control narrow enough to permit close personal guidanice, training, and supervision of the level immediately below. For example, an Agricultural Extension Officer (AEO) guides and supervises about six to eight Village Extension Workers (VEW). In turn, six to eight AEOs are guided and supervised by a subdivisional Extension Officer (SDEO). The SDEOs are supported by a team of Subject-Matter Specialists (SMS), whose role is mainly to define the content of the extension message for each given time sequence, to train the VEWs accordingly and to supervise their field work (see Figure 18.1).  224 EXTENSION EDUCATION AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT Deportment of Administrative Level Agriculture Zone Zone Extension E E E Officer (ZEO) District Subject Matter Specialist (SMS) Subdivision Subdivisional Extension SE SE SDOlI Officer (SDEO) - - L Subject Matter Specialist (SMS) Block level I I T I- I- I r-l r-j Agricultural Extension AEO AEO AEO AEO AEO Officer (AEO) -L---] L___J VEW circle Village Extension VE VE VE VE VE VW VW Worker(VEW) Contact Farm level forrners Frmers FIGURE 18.1 Organization chart of Intensive Extension Service4 The standard organizational structure of the T&V extension service is reproduced in Figure 18.1 (as it operates within the administrative set-up in India): (3) Manageable agent/farmer ratio. The entire organizational structure of the T&V system is erected on the basis of the grassroots unit, the 'VEW circle'. This takes into account the total number of farm families to be assisted in a given area and defines a reasonable number of families which one village worker could be expected to assist. Thus, the ratio is flexible and varies from place to place (1/600, 1/800 or 1/1000) depending, among other  SOCIOLOGICAL DIMENSIONS OF EXTENSION ORGANIZATION 225 factors, on the physical environment, density of population, cropping patterns etc. (4) Fiyecl schedul(e of visits and steady commuinication. The organizational features listed under (1), (2), and (3) are conducive to setting up a stable and systematic work programme for the VEW, which regulates the timing of his village visits and his own training sessions. The possibility of introducing such a stable work programme for the mass of the enormously dispersed extension agents is, perhaps, one of the main keys to the effectiveness of the entire T&V system. Indeed, the system requires that all the farm families assigned to a VEW be divided into eight groups of about equal size. He will visit, in turn, each one of the eight groups in his circle for a full day onc'P every fortnight; he always visits a group on the same day of the week, so the group learns when he shotuld be with them and expects him. The VEW concentrates his efforts, during the village visit, on the 'contact farmers' who represent about 10 per cent of the group, but extends advice to other farmers as well. In the remaining days of the week he attends the regular training sessions. ' The time-bound work programme, as represented graphically in Figure 18.2, provides a compelling matrix for the main actor's role performance. It is not just a rule imposed on the VEW: it becomes a self-organizing principle for the VEW's activity, simultaneously increasing his accounta- bility to the 'clients'-the farmers-and facilitating the monitoring of his movement map by his supervisors. (5) Techniiical backstopping. The organization and operation of the T&V is based on ongoing, continuous training of its agents, as opposed to just preservice (preseasonal) instruction. (6) Instiiutionaliation oJ reesearch linikages. Adequate organizational linkages with applied research institutions are built into the T&V system, at management and middle-range levels. These standard principles are the building blocks of the T&V extension system. Standardization provides for a unified system and is a source of organizational strength. But it also creates scope for flexibility and adjustment to local conditions. For instance, the principle of a work schedule is rigid. but schedules are variable and several variations of the standard schedule (as depicted in Figure 18.2) have evolved. So have the ratios agent farmer and other procedures. What probably is most important about the T&V system is just its systemness: the tight integration of its various parts, the consistency of its organizational features, its built-in devices for organizational monitoring and maintenance make the T&V an organization in the sociological meaning of the concept, and not just another administrative service.  Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun First 1 2 3 4 TRA EXT H 5 6 7 8 TRA EXT H fortnight SMS VIS AEO VIS m Second 1 2 3 4 TRA EXT H 5 6 7 8 TRA EXT H -xH fortnight SMS VIS AEO VIS r 1-8 -Visit farmers group. , TRA -Training conducted by Subject Matter Specialist (SMS). m SMSc EXT-Extra visits for checking field trials, office work, make up visits due to > VIS holiday, illness, etc. H 0 H -Holiday. TRA-Training conducted by Agricultural Extension Officer (AEO). Z AEO. FIGURE 18.2 Typical Timetable for a Village Extension Worker C (fortnightly visits) 0r  SOCIOLOGICAL DIMENSIONS OF EXTENSION ORGANIZATION 227 BEGINNINGS OF THE T&V SYSTEM IN INDIA After its successful implementation in Seyhan (Turkey), the T&V extension system was first introduced in India in 1974 as a component of three limited Command Area Development projects -two in Rajasthan state (Chambal5 and Rajasthan Canal6) and one in Madhya Pradesh (the latter covering only two blocks). In mid-1975, the system was introduced in six districts in West Bengal. Building upon past accomplishments of extension services in India and correcting some previous shortcomings and weaknesses, the new approach generated significant improvements in the performance of extension services in a relatively short time. The first results were so encouraging, that the Government of West Bengal decided in 1975 to expand the reorgani7Ation of the extension service from the initial six districts to the entire state, thus becoming the first state in India to do so. The interest in expanding the T&V system grew stronger in several Indian states. During 1976 a 'new generation' of Agricultural Extension and Research Projects was prepared with World Bank financial and technical assistance. A significant progress in 1976 and 1977 was that the creation of the T&V system was extended beyond relatively small areas, in order to cover entire states. The governments of Orissa, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Assam, and Bihar adopted decisions for administrative reorganization of the existing extension services and their reconstruction and development according to the T&V pattern. These decisions implied, inter alia, the transfer of thousands of village- level workers from under the authority of the Community Development Departments to the Departments of Agriculture. Obviously, this process was not free from internal bureaucratic difficulties, hesitations, resistance, etc. It brought about major changes in the pattern of the community development agencies too. But such a mass shift was a precondition for enforcing the basic organizational principles of exclusivity of extension work for the village agents and the single line of command. Soon, the build-up of the reorganized extension organizations was under way in all the Indian states mentioned, with significant budgetary allocations from the state governments and financial assistance from the World Bank. Several other Indian states (Karnakata, Haryana etc.) have started similar preparations for introducing the T&V system, probably during 1978 or 1979. THE PROJECT APPROACH TO BUILDING EXTENSION ORGANIZATIONS Some information about the magnitude of the new statewide extension organizations could suggest better the breadth of the process and the order of its expected effects. The six Indian states currently implementing the T&V system plan to service a total area of about 35 million hectares with this system. There  00 X Table 18.1 The T & V Extension System in India: Main Project Indicators H Projects introducing Area covered Administrative Expectedd Contact Ratio Ratio Extension staff at Totalf 0 the T & V systcm units beneficiary farmers VEW/ AEO/ full development -_ Z (million ha.') Farmers VEW Project r Dist- Subdi- farm families VEW AEO DEO SMS Totale cost c ricts visions (million) and (USS ; SDEO million) , o 1) West Bengal z Agricultural Extension and Research Project X (March 1977) 6.6 17 50 4.0 320,000 1/1,000 1/8 4000 45 67 200 5217 28.0 C 2) Orissa Agricultural r Development Project (Feb 1977) 4.5 13 30 3.4 448,000 1/600 1/8 5600 700 103 155 7058 40.0 if 3) Madhya Pradesh rr Agricultural