The document discusses the history and evolution of agricultural extension approaches in Nepal. It outlines several conventional approaches used from the 1970s to present, including the training and visit system, integrated agriculture/rural development approach, tuki system, farming system research and extension approach, block production program approach, commodity group approach, pocket package approach, projectization approach, farmers field school approach, and contract and partnership approach. It notes that extension services in Nepal have not been strong and effective, reaching only 55% of cultivated land, and that no single approach could be adopted nationwide given Nepal's diverse geography, climate, and other factors. It stresses the need for more pragmatic, bottom-up policies and increased national self-reliance rather than

1. Past and Present
Amrit Sharma
FOA,AFU
Rampur, Chitwan

2.  Agricultural extension is the application of
scientific research and new knowledge
to agricultural practices
through farmer education.The field of
'extension' now encompasses a wider range of
communication and learning activities organized
for rural people by educators from different
disciplines, including agriculture, agricultural
marketing, health, and business studies.
 Source :wiki

3. 1. ConventionalAg Extension Approach
2. Training andVisit System
3. Integrated Agriculture/ Rural Development
Approach
4. Tuki system
5. Farming system, Research and Extension
Approach(FSR/E)
6. Block Production Program Approach

4. 1. Commodity Group Approach
2. Pocket PackageApproach
3. Projectization Approach
4. Contract and Partnership Approach
5. Farmers Field School- FFS

5. 1. Conventional Ag Extension
Approach
- Oldest in Nepal
- 2016/17 B.S
-Trickle down approach of diffusion theory

6. 2.Training andVisit System
- Dr. Daniel Benor
- World Bank
- 2032 (1975)
- Second Phase: 2042
- Districts: 19 terai/ 4 hills
- Subject matter specialist (SMS), contact
farmer

7. 3. Integrated Agriculture/ Rural
Development Approach
- World bank
- 2033 (1975/6) : Rasuwa, Nuwakot
- Challenging due to lack of coordination
among different bodies
- More oriented towards infrastructure
development

8. 4.Tuki system
- 1977
- Swiss grant
- Integrated Hill Development Project (IHDP)
- Dolakha and Sindhupalchowk (First)
- Tuki: leading volunteer of society/ village for
the development
- Tuki: model farmer, has demonstration farm

9. 5. Farming system, Research and
Extension Approach(FSR/E)
- 1984/85
- British grant
- Inspired by: ICP (Integrated Cereal Project)
- First: Lumle, Pakhribas
- Subject specific divisions were formed
- Research at local farm (farmer’s level)

10. 6. Block Production Program Approach
- US grant
- 2038 B.S. (1981/82)
- Pilot program (Bara, Parsa, Chitwan: 510 ha)
- Later: 28 districts (1 lakh 10 thousands ha)
- Target: Increase yield by Improved cropping
pattern technology, Model impact production
block establishment
- Demanding huge Manpower, Financial, Physical
resources

11. 1. Commodity Group Approach of Agri-
extension
- Participatory approach, self made, self
implemented
- 2045, Pilot districts (Morang, Chitwan,Tanahaun)
as Problem identification and solution technique
(PIST)
- Now in all the districts; considerably successful
- Target: Efficient utilization of limited resources
- Bottom up planning
- Demonstration effect from special groups (crop)
- Focal point: Farmers

12. - Technology dissemination at faster rate
- Saves time and money
- Limited extension workers can connect with
many farmers (rapid relay of message)
- Increases the involvement of small scale
farmers and women farmers
- Useful in figuring real demand thereby easing
supply
- Easy to manage markets and trainings in
group

13. 2. Farmers Field School
- Concept: Indonesia (1989), IPM on Paddy
- In Nepal: FAO (1977) asTechnical cooperation
program (TCP), Chitwan
- Search based learning and experienced based
activities
- Experiment trials, group analysis
- Group: 25-30 farmers; teaching at field
- Target: making them problem solver
- Less use of pesticides, improvement in human
health and environment, gender and social
inclusiveness

14. 3. Contract and partnership approach
- Contract agreement based (between government
agency and I/NGO’s
- Transparency is the key
- Common goals, objectives, wish : partners
- Target: increase production by utilizing limited
resources
- Mutual respect, determined, flexible and simple
directive
- Supply driven rather than demand driven
- Target oriented and less public participation
- I/NGO’s become more responsible towards donors
than target group, they have small coverage

15. 4. Pocket package approach
- Based on special sector of production
- Commodity selection: based on climate and
other production factors
- Project design: Bottom-up approach
- Supplies tech and other equipments as per
the package demand
- Helps in fixing price of commodity and makes
farmers more business oriented

16. 5. Projectization approach
- Project design: based on production of
commodity
- Project framework includes: time, duration,
budget, expected results
- All the plans and strategies are written in
details
- Has been practiced in all 75 districts of Nepal

17.  Extension programs in Nepal aren’t strong
and effective; extension service is available to
only 55% of cultivated land
 Hasn’t reached to all levels
 Unable to maintain sustainability
 One approach couldn’t be adopted
Nationwide

18.  Diverse geography and climate in Nepal
 Availability of technicians and trainings
 Education and awareness among farmers
 Linkage between extension and farmers
 Coordination between government bodies
concerned with agriculture
 Provision of feedback
 Policies reformation (bottom-up approach)

19.  Foreign grants won’t foster national
development
 Increases foreign interference
 Should increase FDI
 Plans and policies should be adopted as per
the status of country (more pragmatic)

20.  A review of the Agricultural Extension
Approaches in Nepal (Dr. Raju Ghimire/
LekhnathAcharya)
 Wikipedia.org

21. ThankYou!
Have a good day!