Extending information

[cakadu]

In another thread, the issue of specialists and extending information aka as extension was brought up. There is a wealth of information out there and it has been identified that one of the gaps out there is the fact that the information is not reaching producers.

What do producers need to see in terms of information, how do you want it delivered and by whom?

[PureCountry]

I'm very happy with the availability of information as it stands right now. Our local 3 or 4 counties and M.D.'s are very good at putting on top-notch seminars, and if people want to know what's being researched and discovered at the Government farms/ranches, pick up the phone! I never hesitate to. Despite what so many of you seem to think about 'EXPERTS' and 'SPECIALISTS', consider this...these are the people who've spent the extra time, money, and commitment to furthering their education in our great industry. In so doing, many of them have made modern farming and ranching what it is today. If it weren't for 'EXPERTS' and 'SPECIALISTS', would we see new developments in crop and forage varieties, chemicals, genetic research, etc, etc.?
When these people talk, I'll gladly shut my mouth and open my ears. I don't know everything, hell none of us do. So why is it so hard to make yourselves listen or read, in order to learn?

[PureCountry]

One more thing...let's not forget the internet. On this thing - which can be as dangerous as it is useful - one can find fact sheets and research papers on absolutely anything to do with agriculture. If it's been studied, it's been documented, if it's documented it can be found, and the internet is probably the best way to find it. Use any type of search engine and type in whatever you want to know. Type in Kverneland plow, Luings, Galloways, genetics, annual crop pastures, and hit search. It's that easy.

[grassfarmer]

PureCountry, I use the Alberta Ag specialists quite a bit too, as an AG extension organisation they are very good, certainly away ahead of what I was used to in Europe. Farmers always tend to distrust information from people who are not actually out all day every day getting their hands dirty - if they are not directly involved how could they know? kind of thing.
My Dad always warned me to study everything these people write and say and do exactly the opposite! That's maybe an unfair generalisation but over the years they tended to advise you to specialise when you should have been diversifying, contracting when you should be expanding etc. I think the advice cowman got to dump your cowherd now would come into that category.

More of a concern to me is the part linking research, private companies and Goverment. Be very dubious of products being promoted by multinationals through Ag extension agencies. Take BST - the hormone given to dairy cows to boost milk production. It got approved for use in the US following a monitored trial at an educational college(or research facility, not sure which). It emerged later Monsanto, the developers gave seed money to the college to run the trial - then they put computer and camera equipment into the dairy barn to monitor the results. Monsanto were the only ones with access to the results and once the trial was over they presented the results to the college to release thereby being granted Government approval for the product. It emerged later from a disgruntled dairyman what had happened, apparently lots of cows got so thin they had to be slaughtered as 1st and 2nd calvers but if this happened they removed these animals records to conceal the fact this had happened - as if this had been known the product may well not have been granted approval.

[cakadu]

What is the best way to get the information to you i.e. internet, mail out, fax, hard copies, demonstrations? What do you find the most effective and creates either an awareness or desire to learn more?

[rsomer]

I think the question we need to be asking in not what information producers need or how to deliver it but who should be providing the information we need.

Alberta Agriculture offers subsidized information to producers in this province. For the producers who use this information they are receiving a subsidy worth several thousands of dollars. That is a good thing. The bad thing is Alberta Agriculture controls who delivers the information and therefore the information that is available.

Producers do not get to choose who they receive the information from. While producers may choose who they get their accounting information from or their legal information from because they are paying for it, they do not get to choose who they get their management information and production information from. Unless producers have a few thousand extra dollars burning a hole in their pocket the tendency is to use the free service from Alberta Agriculture and other government sources. It is very difficult for anyone else to provide a for fee service when they would be competing with the subsidized services of Alberta Ag with their free call center and free information on the Internet and nearly free seminars.

It would be interesting to see what information would become available if the producer could access subsidized information from wherever he choose to get it. For instance for the past years producers could bring in a water well driller of their choice to develop a new well and receive a subsidy on the cost of the well. What would happen if instead of water well, producers could get management information from wherever they wanted and send the bill to the government, free subsidized management and production advice. Would the producers still go to the Alta. Ag specialists or would they go to private for profit sources?

I seriously doubt that government would even consider giving up their total control over information to producers as information is power. Yes there is world of information out there but some it is bad information and some of that bad information is coming from government. Right now producers who feel that the information coming from government is bad information or information that is not suitable for their operation have nowhere else to turn and just turn off.

[cakadu]

That is an interesting way to look at it, rsomer, and it could explain why the information and associated dollars never gets to the people that require it i.e. the producers.

The money flows for delivery extension, information gathering i.e. the recently launched foragebeef.ca and such, but does it actually get the information to producers in a way that it becomes useful knowledge?

This conundrum appears to be where there is a huge gap - is the solution to help close that gap one that would entail the extension information being delivered by 3rd parties at arms length from the government? What would such a system look like and how could it end up being feasible?

[grassfarmer]

Cakadu, personally speaking there is no problem with the actual distribution of the material. The printed press carry all the new findings, combined with the Internet to find research from all over plus the Alberta toll free # to call for specific regional advice. There is more information out there than we have time to read - it's up to you if you utilise it or not.

[cowman]

I agree with grassfarmer. If you want info on just about anything it is out there, you just have to go look. The internet, the western producer, the various ag magazines. Alberta agriculture gives some pretty good info on just about anything you might want to know? Is some of it bad advice? Perhaps, but that is going to happen no matter where you get your info? You have to decide, as best you can, if you can use that info or even agree with it.
We should also realize we are paying for this service, but it is also paid for by the urban taxpayer...and I would suggest that is okay because they in turn benifit in cheaper food?

[rsomer]

There is indeed a lot of information out there but it is not being adopted quickly enough by primary producers. We are in an information age and it is key to the future competitiveness of Canadian agriculture that primary producers are able to adapt the available information to their operations.
At some time primary producers are going to need assistance to manage all the information in order to integrate it into their operations. I think that time is now.
The majority of producers now readily accept and pay for advice from accountants to assist them with managing their operations if only to minimize tax but often other management needs such as succession planning as well. But most producers are still not outsourcing management advice for determining costs, business and strategic planning, enterprise evaluations and investment planning.
I think part of the primary producer’s slowness to adopt these new practices is that to this point there has only been one affordable source of expertise, government extension personnel. Even though the government people are qualified and capable, a suspicion of the advice they offer has been expressed in various threads throughout Agri-ville.
It is possible that this suspicion is bred by a lack of choice and alternatives as much as anything else. Primary producers can shop around for an accountant that they are comfortable with and trust. If producers were to come to government for free management advice they do not have the same freedom of choice of whom they should choose to trust. It is basically a take it or leave it proposition. Governments have reacted to this problem by suggesting, at least privately, that primary producers are a rather slow lot who are reluctant to change.
Myself, I feel that there is an anxiety out there in the rural economy that demonstrates a need for help with cash flow management, and planning for the future but that anxiety is not necessarily enough for the producer to accept advice from anyone who happens to have landed a job with the government. I think it may be time that producers were able to choose which qualified professional person they receive their subsidized advice from if we wish to see the acceptance rate of that advice increase.
If producers could get their subsidized management advice from whomever they chose this would undoubtedly work to increase the acceptance of needed change and adaptation. Within 10 years each small town would have 3 or 4 offices offering management advice to farmers just like there is 3 or 4 accountants offices. If this were to happen Canadian agriculture would be very different with different decision making, different investment practices, and increased profitability. But for this to happen it is crucial that the subsidy available for the advice and information that government is presently providing for free to producers has to also be available for the advice coming from the independent management professional.

[cakadu]

It is an interesting concept that you propose and it would be great if we could get the government to do that. It seems to me there were a couple of federal programs that the federal government dropped i.e. business planning, because they didn't want to compete with private enterprise. I see now that with the renewal arm of the Ag Policy Framework that they are bringing in such a service again.

I daresay the reason we haven't seen management people popping up like accountants is because they cannot compete with what the government charges for seminars etc. as they are doing this to make a living.

It is often said that farmers are slow to adapt to new information, but the reverse of that is true as well. Sometimes these government people are saying many of the same things they were saying 10 years ago, which tends to erode credibility and trust in the information one is getting.

I think that there is also some benchmarking that is missing in this process. One cannot tell how successful a program has been unless you know where you've started from. A particular model is adopted in many of the departments because it happens to be a model that they like, yet there is no clear indication of whether or not the model actually works and does what it is intended to do. That isn't to say that what they are doing isn't right and I'm definitely not bashing the government, it is just a shortcoming that I have observed over the years.

The other shortcoming that I've seen and have talked to the government folk about is about various programs offered. I remember several years ago when a government person said to me that producers just don't pick up on the programs that are offered. I asked him why he thought that was and he said maybe it was something they weren't interested in, so why should they bother. I then asked him if it could be the fact that they announce the program several months before they have all the details worked out and then nothing is said after that. To me, that is a huge problem because they don't say much after the press release.

One glaring example of the government not promoting what it does is the Leduc Food Processing Centre. That has to be one of the best kept secrets n the province. It has been in existence for a good 15 years or so, yet to this day you can run into people who have no idea it exists. During the Ag Summit process several people brought up the fact that we needed a facility where you could test run your products before going to full blown commercialization. Well it exists in Leduc.

Bottom line is that both sides have to be willing to change so that the information that is out there can be turned into useful and productive knowledge.

[grassfarmer]

rsomer, I'm sorry but I don't agree with you on this one - Canada has a wonderful freedom of speech and of action. There is so much information out there that is easily accessable to producers if they don't choose to access it that is their problem. We don't need to be babyied by the Government in every aspect of our lives. Farming is a business and by implication that means you need information management skills -if you haven't got them that puts you at a disadvantage to a farmer that has these skills. That is life - for an industry to be sucessful you need to allow the people that are good at their job to get ahead. I feel constantly nursing the poorer businessmen to try and average out the competitiveness of the industry is a mistake - it's basically communism and we all know how that stifles enterprise.

[ValueChainFX]

grassfarmer, you are probably as right as rain! Although since we have a much more complex industry today than we had even a year ago, how can one have all the expertise needed to take advantage of the opportunities that exist today! Information is without a doubt one of the keys to success, however, the information needs to be in a form that can be understood by the people that can use it. We have long recognized the value of working with information and implementation of that information into our supply chain. Each link or bridge can make the supply chain stronger and more viable. We don't see the government as the sole keeper of the information keys; in fact the opposite is true. As business people linking information in today’s climate is the only way to compete with the big guys. There have been many people working towards this goal and we see the retail sector pushing for this now as well. That probably means we will see linking information streams with-in the next five years. The government and industry experts will soon share the information treasure chest with a new group that may be independent business people but link together through information that makes the whole supply chain work as a seamless continuum.

[rsomer]

"If the future of agriculture in Canada is to be what it ought to be, it has got to be encouraged." Alberta’s Minister of Agriculture, Duncan McLean 1920.

Government support of extension and information transfer is WTO green and not considered to be a subsidy for purposes of international trade.

Supporting the transfer and utilization of information to primary ag producers will not stifle enterprise but create a lasting competitive advantage that is sustainable. I do see the need to offer the information to producers in a form they trust and will embrace. Given the staff reductions in extension the time may be right to offer producers incentives to seek out private information providers. Doing so would increase the pool of experts available to the producer so the producer could choose an expert or experts they trust with the future of their farm, someone who would be available on an ongoing basis; and secondly it will encourage the development of an entrepreneurial group of people trained and skilled in providing the needed information. Doesn’t sound much like communism to me.

[cakadu]

Rsomer, I think you've hit the nail on the head. There is so much information out there that it is hard to sift through it and get the real picture, story, understanding - whatever you want to call it.

A person needs to be able to first and foremost trust the source(s) of information to be reliable, unbiased, current and representing as many sides/opinions/viewpoints as possible in order to make sound decisions based on the information.

We all have a right to information but along with the right comes the obligation to first seek it out, ask questions and understand it as fully as possible. Every generation has had their share of troubles and needed help making decisions based on the information that was available at the time.

There has probably never been a more opportune time to change how information is exchanged and turned into knowledge that will benefit the producer.