Building on local experiences to identify priority needs for extension programs : Burdekin Cane Extension Group Workshop , July 2018
In July 2018 the Burdekin Cane Extension Group met to discuss priority needs for extension programs to support management practice improvements for water quality outcomes in the Lower Burdekin sugarcane industry . Participants considered several aspects of past and current programs in terms of elements of success , the barriers to adoption of improved practices and primary knowledge gaps . The key outputs are summarised below .
Elements of success
� Supporting growers in what they want to achieve and helping to work that out by working closely with them with adequate time and resources . � Ability to incorporate farmer ’ s ideas . � Offering a value proposition to the landholder - emphasis of productivity and profitability outcomes .
� Requires strong element of experienced agronomic support ( value for money when delivered well ). � Spending time to understand individuals and their drivers . � One on One extension – individuals are generally more comfortable , but continuity is important . � Follow up ! � Ability to provide options for longer term engagement . � Workshops can provide the initial connection but only the start .
� Working with women in industry – farm management , finances , open to new ideas , interactive . � A coordinated extension community / network . � Trusted advice – requires continuous skill development . � Supported by reliable measurement ( their farm ). � Providing real time data – water monitoring on and off – farm – for water use , cost , water quality – at the whole farm scale .
� Trials and demonstrations get individuals interested in sharing ideas . � Whole of farm perspective is critical . � Spatially focussing effort needs a unique issue to tackle ( e . g . irrigation runoff ) – difficult to do across multiple issues .
� Focus on catchment ecosystems such as wetlands as receiving environment – closer connection .
Areas for improvement
� Lack of continuity – short term funding programs . � Shifting goal posts – targets , funding programs . � Top down approach to project development with no consideration of outcomes – how are they going to be achieved on the ground .
� Communication – reduce confusion and avoid mixed messages . Need to establish clear and consistent messages among the extension network . � Timely feedback to those who provide data . � Streamlined and effective reporting – clear purpose and end point , with improved coordination of reporting .
� Trust among extension officers – need for strong coordination network .
� Lack of consistency across many aspects , e . g . basins delineation .
� Limited availability of data required to support precision agriculture – void and disconnect .
� Learning from mistakes e . g . capital investment – be clear about poor delivery of outcomes .
� Support for personnel – longevity , mentoring , personal relationships , training in agronomy and extension .
� Greater link between extension providers and investors in guiding program design . E . g . Lack of recognition of the value of the role of One on One extension from investors ( noting it can be expensive , but effective ).
� Showing the benefits of ‘ good ’ extension and the success factors – what are the best / right metrics ?
The characteristics of a potential future extension program were also discussed including program design , delivery models , data and evidence requirements , prioritisation of effort , skills and training and communication needs . The outputs are shown in Table 7.2 .
65