Merits and Limitations of Reorganized Extension System (T & V System)
Merits:
- Increasing the cultivated area under High Yielding Varieties Programme.
- Dissemination of new knowledge of farming for increasing the cropping intensity.
- Increasing employment of family labour.
- Raising marginal value of productivity of all inputs.
- Accelerating the extent of adoption of recommended practices
According to Ray et.al (1979), there was more impact of this system on the small holdings as compared to large ones. Thus T & V system has a considerable positive impact on the farming economy.
Limitations:
Croot (1997) analysed certain limitations of T & V system.
1. The T & V model has served to raise the productivity of crops such as rice & wheat form about 1.5 to 4.5 tones per hectare. It has worked especially in areas with relatively uniform, high potential agro-ecosystems with a conducive institutional support such as effective input supply, a good market and an attractive urban demand. Nevertheless, the conditions for small holder agriculture in rainfed areas are often not so conducive foe agricultural development. Small holder’s agriculture is featured by complex, high risk, variable and diverse agro-cosystems, not only at the farm level but also at the watershed or landscape levels. Moreover, T & V approach is not the most effective for dealing with natural resources management issues.
2. Researchers develop now technology which extension then delivers to farmers. Farmers are expected to adopt these technologies to improve their farming practices. Researchers are extension, to close the innovation development cycle. However, practice teaches us that in hierarchically organized government institutions this hardly occurs. Moreover, experiences show that innovations are for example, which pass form one individual to another or accumulate on the shelf.
3. Research does not appear to be a constant source of new technologies as assumed in the T & V model. Most new ideas do not originate form research, but form practice itself. Farmers themselves are active information seekers, keen experimenters for promoting collective change. The development of innovations appears to be a much more complex process than the “technology transfer” model leads us to believe.
4. The concept of contact farmers does not work very well. In some countries, a modified T & V type has changed his concept into the use of contact groups which has also not worked well.
5. Experiences shows that the ideas of the same message as being appropriate for each farmer located in the same recommendation domain does not make sense. Even in on village, the conditions and opportunities for farming may vary so much with regard to types of soil, labour availability, income or land size, that it can be more relevant to increase the problem solving capacity of farmers than to provide one message supposed applicable to all farmers.
6. Last but not least limitation was that after the World Bank loan for the T & V system expired; many governments were not able or willing to continue to finance this system.