Preferred Extension System for Sustainable Horticulture in ...ijamad.iaurasht.ac.ir/article_540420_1193a0b2e7de6fa955b696296b329982.pdf · I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l

Inte

rnat

iona

l Jou

rnal

of A

gric

ultu

ral M

anag

emen

t and

Dev

elop

men

t, 8(

2), 1

25-1

36, J

une

2018

.

125

Preferred Extension System for Sustainable Horticulturein Sari, Iran

Amir Ahmadpour 1* and Hadi Moumeni Helali 2

Keywords: sustainable horticulture,public extension, privateextension

Received: 01 May 2017,Accepted: 28 July 2017 Lack of understanding of the extension, education, and de-

velopment practitioners’ role and their contribution to sus-tainable agriculture is the main challenge of sustainabilityprojects in Iran. Accordingly, the aim of this study was toidentify the extension system that has been more successful insustainable horticulture. The population consisted of 22 pioneerfarmers that had used or are using the services and/or consultationsof both public and private extension experts in different ways.Based on census data, 20 farmers were studied. A questionnairewas used to collect the data. To determine the face and contentvalidity, a panel of experts and to assess the reliability, incon-sistency ratio was used (IR=0.03). Based on the five sustainabilitycriteria, public extension system was identified as the superiorsystem in the improvement of the sustainability of horticultureactivities. Analytical hierarchy process based on the pair-wisecomparison and the combination of the relative weights ofsub-criteria and options showed that the public system ispreferred over the private system, especially in ecological,cultural, and social dimensions. Given the relative superiorityof the public extension system over the private extensionsystem, it is recommended to use private extension systemalong with the public system as a supplementary system so asto gradually pave the way for assigning the authorities and ac-tivities to the private sector. Then, we can hope for the full pri-vatization of agricultural education and extension system.

Abstract

International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development (IJAMAD)Available online on: www.ijamad.iaurasht.ac.irISSN: 2159-5852 (Print)ISSN:2159-5860 (Online)

1 Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural Extension and Education, Sari Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sari, Iran2 Ph.D. Student, Department of Agricultural Extension and Education, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran* Corresponding author’s email: [email protected]

Inte

rnat

iona

l Jou

rnal

of A

gric

ultu

ral M

anag

emen

t and

Dev

elop

men

t, 8(

2), 1

25-1

36, J

une

2018

.

126

IntroDuctIonMost economic activities in most countries

are concentrated on the agriculture sector. There-fore, the economics of these countries are heavilydependent on this sector and thus, the exportand import of the agricultural commodities canbe a major source of foreign currency for theireconomics (Emadzadeh et al., 2009). On theother hand, the concept of sustainable developmentthat meets the requirements of the present and futuregenerations in its broadest sense has always takenland conservation (Moharamnejad & Mafi, 2010)in general and the conservation of agriculturallands in particular as the main productionresource and driver of the industry into account.

In the age of globalization, sustainability andcommunity development are intimately connectedand ultimately challenged (Sumner, 2009), andfor this reason, the sustainable development ofagriculture is presently the top priority in the de-veloping countries’ national development plans.

Sustainable agriculture encompasses a widearea. It is a means for the improvement ofhuman and environmental well-being, not formaking ever-increasing private profits, regardlessof the social, environmental, and even economiccosts. A truly sustainable horticulture wouldnot only be organic, but also produces social,environmental and economic justice, thus con-tributing to local community development on aglobal scale and becoming part of what hasbeen referred to as sustainable globalization(Sumner, 2009).

Despite the attempts made in this respect, theeconomic growth-driven policies, industrial ren-ovation, technology transmission, and the em-phasis on more production have entailed negativeeconomic, social, and environmental conse-quences, and overall, have resulted in unsus-tainability in most countries (Ertiaei, 2006).Iran has the second highest rate of erosion anddeterioration of fertile soils and natural resourcefollowing Australia so that it is 33 t ha-1 soil.One major reason is the excessive use of chemicalfertilizers and herbicides in the agriculture sector(Malek Saeidi et al., 2009). Also, statistics showremarkable growth of the application of chemicalfertilizers and herbicides. In other words, since

the introduction of the concept of sustainable agri-culture in Iran in 1993 (Ghanbari & Barghi, 2008)and extensive research on the achievement ofthe sustainable agriculture, it has not had opti-mum, practical results. A major relevant challengeis that no supporting institution has been assignedto implement sustainable agriculture policiesyet. In this respect, the public extension systemhas been traditionally responsible for the fulfill-ment of all extension plans, albeit the records ofthe extension activities in recent years show thatthe government has encountered some obstaclesin realizing the goals of agricultural extensionand has been unsuccessful in delivering extensioneducational services as the driver of agriculturaleducation and extension (Bahrami et al., 2010).Elias et al. (2016) argue that the development ofdemand-driven extension service development isa key issue and that private education and extensionsystem should be considered as one of the solutionsbecause it is believed that the private sector canplay a critical role in the effectiveness improvementof the education and extension service by thetransmission of technical knowledge and modernskills to farmers (Rivera &Alex, 2004).

The privately owned extension sector was es-tablished in Iran in the early 2000s with a com-bination of experienced and young experts toimprove the technical and consulting servicesin farming. As the private sector started its ac-tivities by the establishment of consulting servicesand technical engineering firms as the mosteminent, privately owned institutions in theagriculture sector, they started to serve such ac-tivities as surveying and mapping of gardensand extension activities. In addition to the re-sponsibilities defined for them by the Iraniangovernment in the recent policies, the privatesector was assigned a major role in caring forsustainability of agriculture along with the publicsector. Now that some years have passed sincethe launching of the privately owned extensionfirms along with the public sector, it is time toappraise which one has been more successful.Numerous studies have been conducted on sus-tainable agriculture (its aspects, indices, andsignificance) and the use of Analytic HierarchyProcess (AHP), some of which are reviewed in

Preferred Extension System for Sustainable Horticulture ... / Ahmadpour and Helali

Inte

rnat

iona

l Jou

rnal

of A

gric

ultu

ral M

anag

emen

t and

Dev

elop

men

t, 8(

2), 1

25-1

36, J

une

2018

.

127

the next paragraphs.Omani and Chizari (2006) analyzed the sus-

tainability of wheat growers’ farming system andfound that literacy level, technical knowledge,knowledge of sustainable agriculture, crop income,social status, social participation, the extent ofusing communication channels, and participationin education and extension courses accounted for92.5% of the variance of farming system sustain-ability. Rezaei-Moghaddam and Karami (2008)argued that the ecological criterion, that is, rea-sonable use of resources, environment protection,and crop quality, was the most critical criterionfor sustainable agriculture in Iran. In a structuralanalysis of factors affecting agricultural sustain-ability in Qazvin Province, Iran, Poursaeed (2010)employed multivariate decision-making modelsto examine the partnership models in the devel-opment of sustainable agriculture in Ilam Provinceusing the experts’ evaluations and AHP andreported that environmental, technical, andsocial aspects were more important than culture,political, institutional, and economic criteria.Poursaeed et al. (2010) investigated the part-nership models of sustainable development ofagriculture based on Multiple Criteria Deci-sion-Making (MCDM) in Iran and reported thatreduced amount of immigration of farmers, thehiring of agriculture engineers, land integration,higher farmers’ awareness, crop rotation, lowerfertilization rates, lower rates of herbicide ap-plication, fertilizer recommendations, and opti-mum allocation were the main criteria of sus-tainable agriculture in Iran. In a study usingAHP to assess farmers’ priorities and their mainobjectives in the planning of their activities,Kallas et al. (2012) found that the main objectivein economic sector was to maximize total farmincome along with the improvement of cropquality and that the farmers expressed theirwillingness to use the minimum chemical fer-tilizers to reduce the costs and conserve the en-vironment. Asadi et al. (2013) found that eco-logical, social, and economic sustainability pos-itively affected the agricultural sustainability;however, ecological sustainability had a greaterimpact on agricultural sustainability than eco-nomic and social sustainability. In a study

entitled “A multiple criteria evaluation of sus-tainable agricultural development models usingAPH”, Moumeni-Helali et al. (2013) prioritizedthe criteria of ecological sustainability which re-sulted in this list: the application of lower ratesof chemical herbicides per ha, lower fertilizationrates per ha, greater use of bio-control, greateruse of bio-fertilizers, saving in water consumption,and lower frequency of the use of plough.

There have been studies that investigate andexamine the various fields of extension systems.In a study to compare the efficiency of extensionby private sector vs. public sector in the PunjabState of Pakistan, Davidson et al. (2001) showedthat the systems had some duplication in theirprograms, competed to each other in some pro-grams, and had conflicts in some activities.Saadi et al. (2008) compared the efficiency,private extension system, and governmental ex-tension system with respect to preventing de-sertification in an attempt to determine the pre-ferred extension system with a relative theoreticalpreference using 13 education-extension criteria.They found that governmental extension systemhad a relative preference in most issues of pre-venting desertification, but in most cases, thepublic extension system could play a role alongwith the governmental system in desertification.In a study on farmers’ perspectives on the qualityof agricultural information delivery with an em-phasis on the comparison between the publicand private sources, Ali (2013) analyzed farmers’responses to the question about the quality ofthe agricultural information delivery and foundthat the private resources delivered informationwith significantly higher quality to the farmingcommunity than the public resources. Directorateof Agricultural Extension Services conducted astudy on the agricultural extension approachesimplemented in Ghana and reported that thecommodity-based approach had the highest ef-ficiency in enhancing the awareness of activities,the awareness of activity programs, and the de-livery of support services. Training and visitingapproach was the most efficient with respect toresearch and extension, continuous or availability,and productivity. In addition, cooperative ap-proach showed the highest efficiency in the


Inte

rnat

iona

l Jou

rnal

of A

gric

ultu

ral M

anag

emen

t and

Dev

elop

men

t, 8(

2), 1

25-1

36, J

une

2018

.

128

mutual relationship. Omar et al. (2013) workedon alternative approaches of agricultural extensionto promote sustainable agriculture in EasternLibya and reported that public-private extensionapproach had the highest impact on the developmentof sustainable agriculture. Most respondents men-tioned the following items as the important factorsto realize sustainable agriculture: transferring re-search results to farmers and extension agents,participating in the reform of agricultural marketsto stabilize farmers’ income, and supporting mi-crocredit institutions, especially by interactingwith commercial banks. Elias et al. (2016) workedon farmers’ satisfaction with agricultural extensionservices and the influencing factors in NorthWest Ethiopia and recognized a need for de-mand-driven extension service developmentrather than supply-driven service. The servicesshould be aimed to increase the rewards tofarmers to keep their cooperation and satisfactionwhich would result in the sustainability of ex-tension program.

Mazandaran province is one of the agriculturalpoles in Iran, which was ranked first place inthe country's rice and citrus production. Thecounty of Sari, as the center of Mazandaran,has a special role in the field of agriculture andhorticulture. Based on available statistics, thetotal area of the gardens of Sari is about 30114hectares, which has increased by more than2600 hectares over the past three years. Themain garden product in Sari is citrus, whichhas a cultivated area of 21 thousand hectares(Jihad-e Agriculture Organization of Sari County,2017).

A review of the documents in the early pastdecade shows a lack of attention to sustainableagriculture, as in the ecological dimension, sta-tistics shows the uncontrolled and unskilled useof pesticides and fertilizers by farmers. Withthe disclosure of the importance of sustainableagriculture and the approval of governmentpolicies in support of sustainable issue, the ex-tension centers have made extensive efforts inthis regard. The extension centers in Sari in-cluding, seven public and 11 private extensioncenters (operate in the form of consulting andtechnical engineering services companies) are

providing educational and extension services tothe farmers. These centers conduct their educationaland extension programs in various forms, includingcourses, classes, workshops and etc. These programsdirectly or indirectly consider various aspects ofsustainability, including ecological, economic andsocial, which are referred to below.

Conducting and implementing collaborativeprojects is one of the important actions of ex-tension centers. The most important collaborativeproject is farmer field school. This project, withthe general aim of increasing the level ofscientific knowledge and technical skills of gar-deners, while improving the level of participationand social and collective actions in agriculturalactivities, pursue important goals in the ecologicaldimension. Among these goals, special and con-tinuous emphasis is placed on the optimum andlimited use of fertilizers and chemical pesticidesand the use of organic inputs to produce healthy,optimal and economical. The project to promoteentrepreneurship and the development of sus-tainable business is one of the projects thatspecifically focuses on economic dimension ofsustainability. The main objective is to generaterevenue and improve the economic situation ofthe beneficiaries. In addition, one of the mostimportant features of this project is special at-tention to rural women. This project considersocial aspects and gender equality as one of thegoals of sustainability. Another important plan ofextension centers in the ecological and environ-mental field is the holding and follow up of aspecial plan for healthy crop production. Thisplan involves a process and a set of actions andactivities that will lead to the production of healthyand organic products, for example; the reductionand limitation of the use of fertilizers and chemicalpesticides and the use of inputs and organicmethods for combating pests and diseases.

In order to assess the results of these efforts,the amount of chemical pesticides used ingardens has been compared in recent years. Theresult showed that the amount of chemical pes-ticides has decreased over the last three years,as the amount of insecticides and fungicidesused in 2014, decreased from 221275 and 183952to 135355 and 39405 liter-kilo, respectively, in


Inte

rnat

iona

l Jou

rnal

of A

gric

ultu

ral M

anag

emen

t and

Dev

elop

men

t, 8(

2), 1

25-1

36, J

une

2018

.

129

2017 (Jihad-e Agriculture Organization of SariCounty, 2017).

Reviewing the previous studies and researchshows that there is no research about importanceand place of extensions systems in field of sus-tainable agriculture especially in sustainablehorticulture. In this respect, the general objectiveof the research was to introduce a preferred ex-tension system that was more successful forsustainable horticulture in rural regions in Sari.In addition to the main objective of the study,its specific objective was to prioritize the criteriaand sub-criteria of sustainable horticulture.Based on reviewing the above-mentioned studies,the relevant variables (criteria and sub-criteria)extracted and then, the research conceptualframework designed (Figure 1). The detailed ofsub-criteria is shown in Table 2.

MAtErIALS AnD MEtHoDSThe work was a descriptive study and an

applied research in terms of objective, since itsought to examine the criteria of sustainabilityand introduce the superior active extensionsystem in the field of sustainable horticultureby appealing to the principles and assumptionsof sustainable agriculture indices. It was carriedout spatially in Sari County, Iran and temporarilyin 2016. The statistical population was composedof all pioneer horticulturists who had consultedor are consulting with extension agents of bothpublic and private sectors either formally or in-formally and either directly or indirectly. Toidentify these people, first, a list of pioneeringfarmers was prepared by talking to services andextension service of Jahad-e Agriculture Or-ganization. Final pool containing 34 horticul-


Figure 1. The research conceptual framework based on hierarchical structure to determine thepreferred extension system of sustainable horticulture

Preferences (oral judgment) Importance degreeEqual importance/preferenceA little preferred/more important/more optimumStrongly preferred/important/optimumVery strongly preferred/important/optimumCompletely preferred/more important/more optimumThe intermediate values between these judgments

13579

2, 4, 6, 8

Table 1 Pairwise Comparisons Scale

Inte

rnat

iona

l Jou

rnal

of A

gric

ultu

ral M

anag

emen

t and

Dev

elop

men

t, 8(

2), 1

25-1

36, J

une

2018

.

130


Priority

Criteria

Percentage

Sub-criteria

Percentage

Priority

Inconsistencyrate

12345

Economical

sustainability

Technicalsustainability

Ecologicalsustainability

Socialsustainability

Culturalsustainability

31.8

21.9

21.4

12.8

12.1

Recom

mendation, consultation and help w

ith the creation of employm

ent atmosphere in rural areas

Recom

mendation to im

prove the crop qualityAttem

pts to reform agricultural m

arkets to stabilize the horticulturists’ income

Help w

ith the reduction of costsFinancial and credit support of horticulturistsManagem

ent of horticulture production processSupply of inputsSupply of horticulture m

achinery servicesManagem

ent of post-harvest crop wastage

Storage and warehousing of horticultural crop

Recom

mendation to decrease the use of chem

ical herbicidesRecom

mendation to decrease chem

ical fertilization ratesRecom

mendation to use m

ore organic fertilizersRecom

mendation to develop the application of biological pest control

Recom

mendation to develop m

odern irrigation systems

The communication of practical findings to horticulturists

the help with the im

provement of social aw

areness among horticulturists

the educational coverage of horticulturistsHorticulturists’ cooperation in horticultural plansEncouragem

ent for commitment in activities

Attention to local knowledge

recommendation and attem

pts for sound use and conservation of resourcesparticipation in rural people’s problem

-solving processApplication of religious instructions about horticultureAttention to local culture, custom

s and traditions

24.522.918.717.816.123.022.920.420.313.532.520.816.415.414.926.124.421.617.510.327.825.318.014.814.1

1234512345123451234512345

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.08

0.03

Table 2Prioritization of C

riteria and Sub-C

riteria of Sustainable H

orticultural Activities

Inte

rnat

iona

l Jou

rnal

of A

gric

ultu

ral M

anag

emen

t and

Dev

elop

men

t, 8(

2), 1

25-1

36, J

une

2018

.

131

turists. Next, the pioneering horticulturists whohad used the extension services of both publicand private sectors were identified to be 22people. Given the size of the statistical population,data were collected by the consensus method.Eventually, the data collected from 20 horticul-turists were included in the analysis. The publicand private extension systems were prioritizedwith the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) tech-nique. The research tool was a questionnairecomposed of three sections in accordance withthe research objective. The first section containedquestions pertaining to the pairwise comparisonof the agricultural extension systems in termsof the individual sub-criteria of sustainability.The second section was made up of questionsasking the pairwise comparison of sustainabilitycriteria and sub-criteria in terms of the sustain-ability of the horticulture activity. The finalsection collected the participants’ demographicdata. The questionnaire was first delivered to apanel of experts including the experts frompublic and private agriculture sector to voicetheir opinions about the face and content of thequestionnaire. After the final adjustments, itsvalidity was confirmed. The reliability of thequestionnaire was estimated by the rate of in-consistency. The inconsistency rate of judgmentsup to 0.1 is regarded as acceptable. The incon-sistency rate of all pairwise comparisons was es-timated 0.02 to 0.08 in the present study (seeTable 2). Research variables included social, tech-nical, cultural, ecological, and economic criteria,each with public and private extension systems.Given the nature of the study, the data wereanalyzed by Expert Choice 11 Software Packageas it is commonly used in AHP technique.

Analytic hierarchy process (AHP)AHP is a multiple criteria decision- making

method that is based on pairwise comparisonand allows managers to examine different deci-sion-making scenarios. It attempts to focus onthe experts’ technical opinions rather than usingdecision-makers’ quantity (Ghodsipur, 2012).It is a rigorous technique recommended forproblem-solving and decision-making in agri-culture (Khosravi et al., 2011) and the analysis

of sustainable agricultural systems (López &Requena, 2006). According to Saadi et al. (2008),the main advantages of AHP process includeflexibility, adaptability, and the feasibility insolving the simple and complex problems. Thesteps of AHP are as follows:

Step 1. Drawing hierarchical structure. Afterthe literature review, the criteria were identifiedfor sustainable horticultural activities in accor-dance with education and extension models.Next, they were formatted in a structured processas a hierarchy depicted in Figure 1.

Step 2. Weighting. In AHP, the individual el-ements at each level are compared to the corre-sponding element at the higher level on apairwise basis and then, their weights known asthe relative weight are estimated. Next, therelative weights are combined to give the finalweight (final priority) of each option that cameto be known as the absolute weight. The presentstudy specified the relative weights of the indi-vidual criteria, sub-criteria, and options bymaking a pairwise comparison of sustainabilitycriteria on the basis of sustainable horticulture,pairwise comparison of sub-criteria on the basisof the individual criteria of horticulture sustain-ability, and the pairwise comparison of the ex-tension systems (options) on the basis of thesub-criteria, respectively. The pairwise compar-isons were adjusted according to Table 1, andthey were replicated according to Equation (1).Finally, the relative weights were integrated togive the absolute weights for the options andsubsequently, to introduce the superior agriculturalextension system for the sustainable horticultureactivities.

PC=X(X-1)/2 (1)where PC = pairwise comparison, andX = the number of criteria or options.

Step 3. System consistency. In AHP, the deci-sion consistency can be estimated and its good-ness/badness or acceptability/unacceptabilitycan be judged. As was mentioned earlier, theinconsistency rate up to 0.1 is regarded to beacceptable. The inconsistency rates calculatedfor all pairwise comparisons were smaller than


Inte

rnat

iona

l Jou

rnal

of A

gric

ultu

ral M

anag

emen

t and

Dev

elop

men

t, 8(

2), 1

25-1

36, J

une

2018

.

132

0.1 in the present study. Accordingly, the decisionswere all consistent and acceptable.

rESuLtSrespondents’ demographic and professionalcharacteristics

The respondents’ age was in the range of 27-64 years with the mean of 48.74 years. All re-spondents were male. They mostly had a bachelor’sdegree or higher (65%). Their mean experiencein horticulture was 17.53 years and their meanannual income was about 220 million IRR.

Prioritization of criteria and sub-criteria ofsustainable horticulture

To prioritize the criteria and sub-criteria ofhorticulture sustainability, the criteria were firstcompared pairwisely according to the sustain-ability goal and then, the sub-criteria were com-pared pairwisely according to the individualsustainability criteria. From among the aspectsstudied, the economic, technical, and ecologicalaspects were ranked first to third. As is shownin Table 2, these aspects were prioritized forsustainable horticulture activities in the orderof economic aspect (31.8%), technical aspect(21.9%), ecological aspect (21.4%), social aspect(21.8%), and cultural aspect (12.1%). The pri-oritized sub-criteria in economic aspect included“recommendation, consultation and help withthe creation of employment atmosphere in ruralareas” (24.5%), “recommendation to improvethe crop quality” (22.9%), and “attempts toreform agricultural markets to stabilize the hor-

ticulturists’ income” (18.7%). In the technicalaspect, they included “the management of hor-ticulture production process” (23.0%), “thesupply of inputs” (22.9%), and “the supply ofhorticulture machinery services” (20.4%). In theecological aspect, they were “recommendationto decrease the use of chemical herbicides”(32.5%), “recommendation to decrease chemicalfertilization rates” (20.8%), and “recommendationto use more organic fertilizers” (16.4%). Withinsocial aspect, the preferred sub-criteria included“the communication of practical findings and re-sults to horticulturists” (26.1%), “the help withthe improvement of social awareness among hor-ticulturists” (24.4%), and “the educational coverageof horticulturists” (21.6%). In cultural aspects,the prioritized sub-criteria included “attention tolocal knowledge” (27.8%), “recommendationand attempts for sound use and conservation ofresources” (25.3%), and “participation in ruralpeople’s problem-solving process” (18.0%).

Superior agriculture extension system interms of sustainability aspects

To identify the superior extension system interms of the individual sustainability aspects,they were first compared in a pairwise mannerwith respect to the individual sub-criteria, andtheir relative weights were calculated. Next,the sub-criteria pertaining to each criterion werecompared in a pairwise manner and their relativeweights were determined. Next, the relativeweights of the sub-criteria and options werecombined to find out the optimum extension


Sustainability aspects(in order of importance)

Extension systems(In order of importance and the relevant percentage)

Inconsistencyrate

1 2

Economical

Technical

Ecological

Social

Cultural

Public69.6Public55.8Public76.6Public72.9Public73.8

Private30.4Private44.2Private23.4Private27.1Private26.2

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.08

0.03

Table 3Preferred agricultural extension system with respect to the criteria of sustainability

Inte

rnat

iona

l Jou

rnal

of A

gric

ultu

ral M

anag

emen

t and

Dev

elop

men

t, 8(

2), 1

25-1

36, J

une

2018

.

133

system for the sustainability in each aspect. Asshown in Table 3 and given the percentages ofeconomic, technical, ecological, social, and cul-tural criteria, the public extension system wererecognized as the preferred extension system

The functions of extension systems (sensitivityanalysis) are depicted in Figure 2 with an em-phasis on sustainability criteria. The sensitivityanalysis shows the extent of variation of the op-tions priority as the individual criteria arechanged. Figure 2 indicates the change in thepriority of extension systems with the importanceof sustainability criteria. The sensitivity analysismodel displayed that the role of the publicsystem diminished to a greater extent in thetechnical aspect than in other aspects of sus-tainability, whilst the other aspects did notchange remarkably as compared to each other. Itimplies that the public system was less successful

in technical sustainability than the private extensionsystem among all aspects of sustainability.

Agriculture extension system preferred forsustainable horticulture

As was stated, the relative weights of the optionswere specified on the basis of the individual sub-criteria and the relative weights of the sub-criteriawere specified on the basis of their respectivecriteria. Next, the relative weights of the criteriawere determined after their pairwise comparisonon the basis of the objective, that is, the sustainabilityof the horticultural activities. Next, the relativeweights of the criteria, sub-criteria, and optionswere integrated according to which the public ex-tension system was selected as the preferred ex-tension system for sustainable horticulture with68.2% and optimum inconsistency rate of 0.03.The end result is shown in Figure 3.


Figure 2. Sensitivity analysis of the extension systems in terms of sustainablehorticulture criteria

Figure 3. Preferred agricultural exten-sion system for sustainable horticulture

Inte

rnat

iona

l Jou

rnal

of A

gric

ultu

ral M

anag

emen

t and

Dev

elop

men

t, 8(

2), 1

25-1

36, J

une

2018

.

134

DIScuSSIon AnD concLutIonSThe present study employed AHP to identify

the agricultural extension system preferred forthe sustainability of horticultural activities inSari County, Iran. The prioritization of the criteriaon the basis of the respondents’ assessments andusing AHP technique showed that the economic,technical, and ecological aspects are more im-portant than the social and cultural aspects. Thesignificance of these criteria has been emphasizedby Asadi et al. (2013), Omar et al. (2013) andPoursaeed (2010), likewise, underscored theimportance of these standards. Consequently, itcan be inferred that the aspects important forthe sustainable horticultural activities are theeconomic issues that seem to be the foundationof the sustainability of any activity includinghorticulture, the technical issues that addressthe garden maintenance, and the ecologicalcriteria whose key aspects are lower consumptionrates of herbicides and fertilizers.

The sensitivity analysis showed that the publicsystem was less successful in technical sustain-ability. In other words, the private system couldkeep the pace with public system with respectto technical sustainability. It emphasizes theoptimum performance of privately owned ex-tension system in the technical aspect in recentyears. Following the integration of the relativeweights of the criteria and sub-criteria of sustainablehorticultural activities as well as the agriculturalextension systems (options), the public system(68.2%) was finally selected as the preferred ex-tension system for the sustainable horticulturalactivities with 0.03 inconsistency rate. Consistentwith our findings, Saadi et al. (2008) reportedthat the public extension system was in relativepreference, but in most cases, the private extensionsystem could play a key role along with thepublic system. In addition, Omar et al. (2013)stated that public-private extension approachwas deeply effective in the development of thesustainable agriculture.

The fact is that the private extension serv-ices are more welcomed among high-incomefarmers than are among low-income farmers(Khatoonabadi, 2005). In this respect, it is gen-erally believed in Iran that the horticulturists

are more prosperous than farmers, and on theother hand, they have more information re-quirements that cannot be met by the public ex-tension system. Thus, the horticulturists wereexpected to use the services of the private sectormore extensively. Yet, the results showed theopposite which may be related to the duplicationor the provision of essentially similar servicesby the public and private sectors as has beenmentioned in Davidson et al. (2001), too. Anotherreason for the less extensive use of private ex-tension services is the lack of the supply ofsurplus services by private sector (the servicesthat would help the sustainability enhancement),that is, by itself, related to the fact that mosthorticulturists in Northern Iran are smallholders,and it is not economical for them to pay forsuch services. Likewise, we should not overlookthe likely lower quality of the private sectorservices in sustainable agriculture (e.g., recom-mendations to decrease the use of herbicides,chemical fertilizers, etc.) as compared to thepublic sector, which discourages the horticulturistsfrom using the services of the private sector inIran. However, Ali (2013), in a study in India,showed that the private sources provided infor-mation to farming communities with significantlyhigher quality as compared to public systems.

Given the results of the present study showingthe relative superiority of the public extensionsystem in sustainability of horticultural activities,on the one hand, and the emphasis placed onprivatization in Article 44 of the Constitutionof the Islamic Republic of Iran, on the otherhand, the government is required to cautiouslymove toward the privatization of agriculturalextension and develop its scope of activity inits attempt to fulfil privatization policies in thefield of rural agriculture, especially horticulturalactivities. In this respect, it is very critical toconsider that most local farmers are smallholders.Moreover, given the relative superiority of publicextension system over the private system, it isrecommended to use private extension systemalong with the public system as a supplementarysystem so as to gradually pave the way to assignthe authorities and activities to the private sectorwith the maturity of the private system over


Inte

rnat

iona

l Jou

rnal

of A

gric

ultu

ral M

anag

emen

t and

Dev

elop

men

t, 8(

2), 1

25-1

36, J

une

2018

.

135

time. Considering these recommendations, onecan hope for the full privatization of agriculturalextension system.

AcknowLEDgEMEntSThe authors would like to thank Islamic Azad

University, Sari branch for financial support ofthis project. We also thank the anonymous re-viewers of our paper for their useful comments.

rEFErEncESAli, J. (2013). Farmers' perspectives on quality

of agricultural information delivery: A comparison between public and private sources. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 15(4), 685-696.

Asadi, A., Kalantari, K., & Choobchian, S. (2013). Structural analysis of factors affecting agricultural sustainability in Qazvin Province, Iran. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 15(1), 11-22.

Bahrami, A., Shabanali Fami, H., Pezeshki Rad, G., & Mahmoodi, M. (2010). A comparative study on the performance of private extension agencies vs. public extension, using selected indicators, Hamadan Province. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Research, 40-2 (4), 161-168. (In Persian with English Abstract)

Davidson, A. P., Ahmad, M., & Ali, T. (2001). Dilemmas of agricultural extension in Pakistan: Food for thought. Overseas Development Institute (ODI). Agricultural research & extension network. Retreived from https://www. odi.org/ sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/5220.pdf

Elias, A., Nohmi, M., Yasunobu, K., & Ishida, A. (2016). Farmers’ satisfaction with agricultural extension service and its influencing factors: a case study in North West Ethiopia. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 18(1), 39-53.

Emadzadeh, M., Zahedi Keivan, M., & Aghaei, K. (2009). Determination of cultivation optimum pattern in farms with attention to risk and uncertainly conditions(An approach: interval linear programming). Agricultural Economics and Development, 17 (67), 73-92. (In Persian

with English Abstract)Ertiaei, F. (2006). Factor underpinning rural youths'

participation in agriculture development and extension programs in Kermanshah. Unpublished thesis, Department of Agriculture, Tarbiat Moddarres University, Iran.

Ghanbari, Y., & Barghi, H. (2008). Key challenges of sustainable development of agriculture in Iran. Journal of Rahbord, 16, 218-234. (In Persian)

Ghodsipur, H. (2012). Analytic hierarchy process. Tehran: Amir Kabir University of Technology Press. (In Persian)

Jihad-e Agriculture Organization of Sari County (2017). Statistics of chemical pesticides used in gardens. Unpublished report, Sari (In Persian).

Kallas, Z., Baba, Y., & Rabell, C. (2012). How important are cultural environmental objectives for rice farmers in South Senegal. In International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE) Triennial Conference, Brazil, 18-24 August 2012.

Khatoonabadi, A. (2005). Survey Research on Some Aspects of Agricultural Extension Privatization in Isfahan Province from the Viewpoint of Extension Officers. Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources, 9(1), 41-60.

Khosravi, J., Asoodar, M.A., Alizadeh, M.R., & Peyman, M.H. (2011). Application of multiple criteria decision making system compensatory (TOPSIS) in selecting of rice milling system using. World Applied Sciences Journal, 13(11), 2306-2311.

López, C.P., & Calatrava-Requena, J. (2006). A multifunctional comparison of conventional versus alternative olive systems in Spain by using AHP. In International Association of Agricultural Economists Conference. Gold Coast, Australia, August 12-18, 2006

Malek Saeidi, H., Ajili, A., & Rezaei Moghaddam, K. (2009). Factors affecting knowledge of agricultural experts toward organic farming in Jihad-e-Keshavarzi Organization, Khuzestan Province. Iranian Journal of Agricultural Economics and Development Research, 40 (2), 81-91. (In Persian with English Abstract)

Moharamnejad, N., & Mafi, A. (2010). Strengths,


Inte

rnat

iona

l Jou

rnal

of A

gric

ultu

ral M

anag

emen

t and

Dev

elop

men

t, 8(

2), 1

25-1

36, J

une

2018

.

136

weaknesses, opportunities and threats of the execution of forest principles in the northern forests of Iran. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 11 (4), 149-172. (In Persian with English Abstract)

Moumeni-Helali, H., Ahmadpour, A., & Poursaeed, A. (2013). Improving the ecological sustainability by applying the appropriate cultivars of rice: Using AHP. International Journal of Agricultural Science, Research and Technology in Extension and Education Systems, 3(1), 13-18.

Omani, A., & Chizari, M. (2006). Sustainability analysis of wheat growers' farming system (A case in Khuzestan Province). Iranian Journal of Agriculture Science, 37 (2), 257-266. (In Persian)

Omar, J. A. E., Abu Bakar, A. H., Jais, H. M., & Shalloof, F.M. (2013). Alternative approaches of agricultural extension for dissemination of sustainable agricultural extension in eastern Libya. International Journal of Science and Nature, 4(1), 34-39.

Poursaeed, A. (2010). A study on the partnership systems in sustainable agriculture development in Ilam Province using multivariate decision-making models. Unpublished dissertation, Science and Research Branch of Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran (In Persian).

Poursaeed, A., Mirdamadi, M., Malekmohammadi, I., & Hosseini, J.F. (2010). The partnership models of agricultural sustainable development based on Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) in Iran. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 5(23), 3185-3190.

Rezaei-Moghaddam, K., & Karami, E. (2008). A multiple criteria evaluation of sustainable agricultural development models using AHP. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 10(4), 407-426.

Rivera, W. M., & Alex, G. (2004). The continuing role of government in pluralistic extension systems. Journal of International Agricultural

and Extension Education, 11(3), 41-52.Saadi, H., Kalantari, K., & Iravani, H. (2008).

Determination of preferable extension system for preventing desertification: An application of Analytical and Hierarchical Process (AHP). Iran Agricultural Extension and Education Journal, 4 (1), 1-13. (In Persian with English Abstract)

Saaty, T.L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83-9

Sumner, J. (2009). Sustainable horticulture and community development: More than just organic production. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 33(4), 461-483.


How to cite this article:Ahmadpour, A., & Moumeni Helali, H. (2018). Preferred extension system for sustainable horticulturein Sari, Iran. International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development, 8(2), 125-136.urL: http://ijamad.iaurasht.ac.ir/article_540420_8fa60c95de416d1fb7c19f690c1a3bf4.pdf

Preferred Extension System for Sustainable Horticulture in ...ijamad.iaurasht.ac.ir/article_540420_1193a0b2e7de6fa955b696296b329982.pdf · I n t e r n a t i o n a l J o u r n a l

Documents