Agriculture Reference
In-Depth Information
of the extension. He argues that the public outreach function of the pub-
lic university, epitomized by extension, has failed to adapt to the new
role of agriculture in society and failed to remain engaged with the issues
facing society at large.
46
He observes that, nationwide, extension has
failed to serve agriculture because it has essentially reduced its role as
serving agriculture, not the public good. He notes a national pattern of
agricultural interest groups “taking extension hostage” by capturing the
resources and work of extension agencies. This is a strategy that has
served them well in the short term, but that ultimately results in a collec-
tive loss for the agricultural sector when the public perceives that it is
providing funds for extension with no defensible public purpose. Why
should the taxpayer fund technology transfer to private individuals?
Extension service budgets in the states of Arizona, Oregon, Washington,
Maryland, Texas, Colorado, Oklahoma, and Alabama were all cut
between 2001 and 2004, and Georgia lost more than 50 percent of its
extension service personnel.
47
The UC Cooperative Extension service suf-
fered serious budget cuts: 25 percent between 2001 and 2003. Recall the
schematic for the “new model” for LGU research in figure 2.2, which
omits any role for extension. If the primary research thrust of the LGU
is to patent biological knowledge for private industry, extension services
become vestigial.
Alternative Projects for Alternative Agricultural Knowledge
Against the backdrop of mounting evidence of the environmental and
social consequences of industrial agriculture, recurring indictments of
the land-grant-university system's complicity in designing it, and vexing
questions from state elected officials, LGU administrators in several
states recognized the value of creating programs for sustainable agricul-
ture during the 1980s. At present there are 11 programs, but they vary
significantly in size and mission (see table 2.1). Each represents the inter-
action between local constituencies advocating for a program and the
context of broader criticism of LGUs. Non-governmental organizations
such as CAFF, and some independent consultants such as Glades Crop
Care in Florida, have played important roles, but none have been as
influential as the publicly funded programs in LGUs.
48
Many of the states
with these programs had farmer institutes prior to the creation of a
