Capacity Development of Agricultural Stakeholders in Coimbatore district of Tamil Nadu-An Analytical Study

Abstract

This study was taken up to understand the training gaps and training needs of the agricultural stakeholders such as public, private extension officials and farmers in Tamil Nadu. The data were collected using pre tested well-structured questionnaire from public and private extension officials and using semi-structured interview schedule in case of farmers. The results show that training gaps are relatively higher among public extension officials than private extension officials. Demonstrations, group discussions, field visits, video lessons and SMS are the preferred training methods by the stakeholders.

Full text

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327765319
Capacity Development of Agricultural Stakeholders in Coimbatore district of
Tamil Nadu-An Analytical Study
Article · September 2018
DOI: 10.26725/JEE.2017.4.29.5972-5977
CITATIONS
0
5 authors, including:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
SOCIAL CAPITAL MODEL OF KUTTAPATTI GOVERNMENT NURSERY FARM– A CASE STUDY View project
FARMERS’ INTEREST GROUP OF GUAVA IN DINDIGUL DISTRICT- A PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS View project
Naveen Kumar M R
Tamil Nadu Agricultural University
10 PUBLICATIONS0 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Suganthkumar Palani
Tamil Nadu Agricultural University
4 PUBLICATIONS0 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Naveen Kumar M R on 20 September 2018.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

5972
Capacity Development of Agricultural Stakeholders in Coimbatore
district of Tamil Nadu – An Analytical Study
M. R. Naveen kumar1, P. Suganthkumar2 , H. Philip3,
M. Asokhan4and N. Sriram5
ABSTRACT
This study was taken up to understand the training gaps and training needs of the
agricultural stakeholders such as public, private extension ofcials and farmers in Tamil
Nadu. The data were collected using pre tested well-structured questionnaire from public
and private extension ofcials and using semi-structured interview schedule in case of
farmers. The results show that training gaps are relatively higher among public extension
ofcials than private extension ofcials. Demonstrations, group discussions, eld visits,
video lessons and SMS are the preferred training methods by the stakeholders.
Keywords : Capacity development; agricultural stakeholders; training gaps; training
needs; Tamil Nadu
1. PhD scholar, 2. PG Scholar, 4. Professor & Head, 5. Associate Professor, Dept. of Agricultural Extension and Rural
Sociology and 3. Director of Extension Education, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore - 64 1003. India
Received : 21-11-2017; Accepted : 26-04-2018
INTRODUCTION
Capacity development is
dependent on the local context. Hence, no
two stakeholders need the same capacity
to prevail on. Stakeholders either are the
group of people who gets affected in the
positive or negative way by the decision
whichever took in the organizational
or institutional or at national level. For
example., the agricultural stakeholders
involves international organisations
such as FAO, national organisations as
Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’
welfare, several NGOs, Agricultural input
manufacturers, suppliers, dealers, Public
and private extension ofcials, farmers
and their agents etc.,
In order to cope up with several
contemporary transitions such as,
shrinking per capita agricultural
resources, changing farmer’s and
consumer needs, climate change,
introduction of new technologies,
changing preference of knowledge
on social systems, information and
communication technology tools’
inuence, gender mainstreaming etc.,
the capacity development among the
agricultural stakeholders becomes
inevitable.
In order to frame effective
capacity development programmes an
understanding of the capacity needs of
Journal of Extension Education
Vol. 29 No. 4, 2017
DOI:https://doi.org/10.26725/JEE.2017.4.29.5972-5977
Research Article
Journal of Extension Education
Vol. 29 No. 4, 2017
DOI:https://doi.org/10.26725/JEE.2017.4.29.5937-5944

5973
the stakeholders are necessary for which
the analytical study have been conducted
among the three kinds of agricultural
stakeholders, viz., public extension
ofcials, private extension ofcials and
farmers.
METHODOLOGY
The research design used was
Ex-post facto. Simple random sampling
procedure was followed to select the
samples. The respondents were public
extension ofcials such as, Agricultural
ofcers, Assistant agricultural ofcers
and Subject matter specialists of ATMA
scheme; with regard to private extension
ofcials, Marketing executives and
Business managers were surveyed.
Farmers belonging to Pasuvoor, AS
Kulam, Maadhampatti, Chinavedampatti
and Thondamuthur of Coimbatore
district of Tamil Nadu were included. The
sample size was 90 i.e., 30 samples per
category. Data collection tools used were,
pre tested well-structured questionnaire
for public and private extension ofcials
and semi-structured interview schedule
in the case of farmers. Modes of data
collection were, through personal
interview, online mailing, social media
and telephonic interview. The statistical
tools used were percentage analysis and
cumulative frequency.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
Training gaps are denoted as,
the vacuum that exists on already
provided training components such as
training interval, understanding level,
interactiveness, approachableness and
feedback obtainment of the trainers.
The result shows that the training
gap existence was more in terms of
government extension ofcials than
the private extension ofcials, as the
government ofcials fell under the
category of medium to high.
Training need refers to the focused
area in which the respondents desired
training. Data were collected on several
sub variables such as training content
for public and private extension ofcials
and farmers, training venue for all three
kinds of stakeholders, Training duration,
Training period, Trainers and Training
methods.
The sub variable ‘training content’
refers to the content or message of the
training programme. Training venue
denotes the places where the chosen
agricultural stakeholders wish to undergo
training. Training duration denotes
Table 1.
Distribution of Respondents based on
Training Gaps
(n = 60)
Sl.
No. Category
Government
ofcials
Private
ofcials
No. % No. %
1 Low 4 13.33 826.67
2 Medium 12 40.00 8 26.67
3High 14 46.67 14 46.67

5974
the number of days the agricultural
stakeholders would like to undergo per
training. Training period denotes the
season in which the trainees would like to
attend the training. The ‘trainers’ refers
to the qualied persons in specialized
elds under whom the trainees are
willing to attend the training and the
Training methods relate to methods of
Table 2.
Distribution of Respondents based on Training Skill for Ofcials
(n = 60)
Sl. No. Cate gory
Government ofcials Private ofcials
No. % No. %
1 Technical skills 21 70.00 16 53.33
2Soft skills 5 16.67 11 36.67
3Technical + Soft skills 4 13.33 3 10.00
4. Total 30 100.00 30 100.00
*Multiple responses
training such as, Power Point lectures,
group discussion, demonstrations, eld
visit, video lessons, SMS and Kisan voice
calls.
Table 2 implies that both public
and private extension ofcials have
favoured technical training alone than the
soft skills training and the combination
of both technical and soft skill training.
Table 3.
Distribution of Respondents based on Training content for Farmers.
(n = 30)
Sl.
No
Particulars Frequency* Percentage
1. Crop production and Protection 21 70.00
2. Post-harvest technologies 4 13.33
3. Marketing techniques 19 63.33
4. Savings and Investment 8 26.67
5. Formation of Farmer groups and
associations
11 36.67
*Multiple responses

5975
Table 3 infers that farmer
respondents were showing much
interest towards the crop production
Table 4.
Distribution of Respondents based on Training needs
(n = 90)
Particulars Category
Government
ofcials
Private
ofcials Farmers
No. % No. % No. %
Training
Venue
Own village 11 36.67 -- 620.00
Research Institutes 5 16.67 10 33.33 413.33
Agrl. Ofce -- -- 2 6.67
Success farmer elds 14 46.66 516.67 18 60.00
Star hotels -- 15 50.00 -- --
Training
Duration
1-3 days 16 53.33 30 100.00 25 83.34
4–7 days 826.67 -- -- 5 16.66
>1 week 620.00 -- -- -- --
Training
period
Before cropping season 16 53.33 27 90.00 11 36.67
On cropping season 620.00 310.00 13 43.33
After problem arises 4 13.33 -- -- 4 13.33
Without affecting
routines 413.33 -- -- 2 6.67
Trainers
Academicians /
Scientists 13 43.33 516.67 413.33
Agri. dept. ofcials 10 33.33 7 23.34 6 20.00
Private ofcials 516.67 16 53.33 3 10.00
Progressive farmers -- -- -- -- 17 56.67
Bureaucrats 2 6.67 26.67 -- --
and protection aspects trainings
followed by marketing techniques.

5976
Table 4 indicates several phases
of training needs. The public extension
ofcials and farmers have shown
interest towards attending trainings at
the progressive farmer elds for better
understanding of the clientele’s mindset.
Whereas, majority of private extension
ofcials have shown interest towards
attending trainings at the star hotel as it
ensures conducive learning environment.
Irrespective of the classication,
majority of the respondents have shown
keen interest to attend the training of
less than 3 days. This might be due to
their fear of affecting their routines if the
training prolonged more than 3 days.
In the case of training period, due
to their busy working schedule, public
and private extension ofcials were
interested to attend the training before
the start of the cropping season. However,
majority of the farmers were interested
to attend the training once the cropping
season starts, the reason quoted by the
farmers while inquiry was their lack of
ability to retain the knowledge for longer
time obtained through training.
When it comes to trainers, public
extension ofcials were interested to
be trained from the academicians and
scientists. Private extension ofcials were
interested to get trained from their own
experienced senior colleagues. Farmers
were interested to learn from their locally
successful progressive farmers.
The training methods, which were
desired by the majority of the public
extension ofcials for their effective
learning, demonstrations and eld visits.
Private extension ofcials were
interested towards learning through
group discussion and video lessons.
Whereas, farmers had shown interest
towards learning through demonstrations
Particulars Category
Government
ofcials
Private
ofcials Farmers
No. % No. % No. %
Training
methods
Power point lectures 5 16.67 6 20.00 9 30.00
Group discussion 17 56.67 16 53.33 19 63.33
Demonstrations 23 76.67 13 43.33 30 100.00
Field visit 19 63.33 826.67 18 60.00
Video lessons 310.00 15 50.00 310.00
SMS -- -- -- -- 27 90.00
KCC voice calls -- -- -- -- 17 56.67

5977
and SMS, as they felt normal training
which engages them completely for whole
day as hectic; providing the information
in simple local language and in several
small parts in a regular basis shall help
them in better retainment.
CONCLUSION
From the study, it could be
concluded that majority of the farmers
are in need of trainings related to crop
production, protection and marketing
aspects. They should be trained for less
than three days by the onset of cropping
season in the local progressive farmer
elds by the progressive farmers using
demonstration method. They should send
regular SMSs for making the training
programme effective. Majority of the
public and private extension ofcials have
favoured technical training alone. Public
extension ofcials shall be trained for less
than 3 days before the start of cropping
season in the local progressive farmer
elds by the academicians and scientists
using demonstrations and eld visits for
making the training programme effective.
In case of private extension ofcials, the
training programme formulated for less
than 3 days in the star hotels before the
onset of cropping season by the senior
private extension ofcials using group
discussions and video lessons shall be
effective.
REFERENCES
Mani, S. (1996). A Study on Training
needs of Agricultural Ofcers under
Tamil Nadu Agricultural Development
Project. Unpublished M.Sc. Thesis.
TNAU, Coimbatore.
View publication statsView publication stats