Social Networks for Agricultural Development
-
Upload
cimmyt-int -
Category
Science
-
view
1.153 -
download
3
Transcript of Social Networks for Agricultural Development
Technology Revolution?
Low literacy in local lang
No bank account Expensive credit
No unique ID
Poor roads
Credit card
Mobile devices and connectivity not enough!
farmer expert
Quantity buyers Poor quality
control
Market
4
?
Main source of information about new technology and
farm practices over the past 365 days (India: NSSO 2005)
Agricultural Social Networks
4
5 5
Video provides…
– Resource-savings: human, cost, time
– Accessibility for non-literate farmers
Digital Video for Extension
6
Six months in field trying various combinations Over 200 days of surveys, ethnographic investigation, and iterative design
Background of actors in video, Types of content, Location and timing of screening, Method of dissemination,
Degree of mediation, Background of mediator, etc.
Background of actors in video, Types of content, Location and timing of screening, Method of dissemination,
Degree of mediation, Background of mediator, etc. 6
Early Experimentation Parameters Varied Early Experimentation
7
Participatory Content Production
7
Digital Green Approach
Introduction to innovations
– Standard extension procedure
Rough “storyboarding” – Repetitive pattern; easy to
learn
– Minimize post-production
Local farmers on their own fields
– Reduce perception of “teachers”
– Promote “local stars”
8 8
Digital Green Approach
Videos Curriculum
Online video database
http://www.digitalgreen.org
>2,800 videos of 8-10 minutes each
Quality-control, minor video editing,
and metadata tagging
Indexed by type, topic, locale,
season, crop, etc.
Distributed via memory cards
9 9
Digital Green Approach
Mediated Instruction
Local mediator
– Performance-based honorarium
Human engagement
– Field questions, capture
feedback, encourage
participation
– Balance genders
On-demand screenings
– Choice time and place
– Not “stand-alone” kiosk
Support and monitoring
– Daily metrics and feedback
– Official extension staff
10 10
Digital Green Approach
Structured Sequencing
Group Participation
Practices with
longer-term
visible rewards
Practices with
short-term
visible rewards
Community Assessment
Audience
Awareness
Season
Location
Time
12 1
2
3
Network Effect
Viral Web 2.0 in the Web-less world
- Content ecosystem: education, entrepreneurship, entertainment
- Cost-realistic access: pico projectors, TVs, DVD players, and camcorders
Reinforce existing social networks to diffuse innovations through communities
Local “idol” competitions to be a better farmer
Digital Green Approach
12
13
Metrics: – Knowledge: Before-and-after
– Attendance: Farmers at each screening
– Interest: Intent to take-up a practice
– Adoption: Number of households taking up each new farming practice or technology
13
Experimental Set-Up Preliminary Evaluation
Expert
Extension
Officer
Farming
Community
Farming
Community
Farming
Community
Research Assistant
Local Mediator Local Mediator Local Mediator
Poster Green(3)
Same as Digital Green with local mediator, but no TV/DVD Mediator makes posters and holds regular group sessions
Classical GREEN Same as usual
Digital Green 1 screening/group/fortnight Cost:
Rs. 9,500 ($240) for TV/DVD per village PC / camera costs shared Extension officer shared Mediator salary
Accountability: Daily metrics and feedback Official extension staff
15-month study
Audio Green (1) Same as Poster Green with MP3 audio tracks from videos
14
7 times more adoptions over classical extension
14
Sustained local presence
Mediation
Repetition (and novelty)
Integration into existing extension operations
Social homophily between mediator, actor, and farmer
Desire to be “on TV”
Trust built from identities of farmers and villages in videos
Digital Green: Early Results
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Ap
r-0
7
May
-07
Jun
-07
Jul-
07
Au
g-0
7
Sep
-07
Oct
-07
No
v-07
Dec
-07
Jan
-08
Feb
-08
Mar
-08
Ap
r-0
8
May
-08
Jun
-08
Cu
mu
lati
ve
Ad
op
tio
n R
ate
(%)
Classic GREEN
Digital Green
Poster Green
Audio Green
15
System Cost (USD) /Village/Year
Adoption (%) /Village/Year
Cost/Adoption (USD)
Classical GREEN $840 11% $38.18
Digital Green $630 85% $3.70
Poster Green $490 59% $4.15
Cost-Benefit
15
Note: Decreasing amortized cost of hardware with time and scale
Digital Green is at least 10 times more effective
per dollar spent than classical extension!
1
10
100
1000
10000
2006 2008 2009 2012 2013 2015
Vill
ages
Pilot Research NGO Bootstrap Government and Private
Sector Partnerships
Personalized
• Analytics Data
• Farmer Feedback
Localized
• Extension Interventions
• Content Library
Generalized
• Literature Reviews
• Research Trials
Self Help Group Savings/Credit
Soil Sampling
Seed Treatment
Line Sowing
…
Market Linkages
Government Schemes
The Internet in the
Developed World
The essence of the Internet is just
GET, POST, and a cloud of computing devices,.
24
Computers (and their supporting infrastructure) are scarce in the BOP.
Digital Green
But, there are other means to GET and POST.
The Internet in the
Developing World?
25
Explode Internet for
BOP:
Wired,
wireless,
and beyond!
26
Financial
operational costs,
maintenance,
training
Digital
hardware,
software,
connectivity,
content
Physical
building,
goods,
transport,
roads
Human
education,
computer literacy,
motivation,
awareness
Social
institutions,
norms,
political support
Technology is Just One Part
Financial
operational costs,
maintenance,
training
Human
education,
computer literacy,
motivation,
awareness
Social
institutions,
norms,
political support
Digital
hardware,
software,
connectivity,
content
Physical
building,
goods,
transport,
roads
In the Developed World… (includes wealthier segments of developing countries)
Technology magnifies human intent and capability.
Technology itself requires support from well-intentioned, competent people or organizations.
Successful technology interventions work as a part of well-intentioned, competent organizations.