Extension Plan Addressing Weed Problem in East Queensland - Literature review Example

Extension Plan Addressing Weed Problem in East Queensland 1. Background Lantana Camara, commonly referred to as Lantana is considered to be the weed of national importance in Australia. It originates from tropical and subtropical America and is a major weed pest in over 60 countries. It is considered to be one of the world’s 10 worst weeds because of its levels of invasiveness, potential for spread and the economic and environmental impacts that it has (Australian Weeds Committee, 1999-2004). It is considered as the weed of national importance in Australia because of its impact on primary industries, conservation and biodiversity and the extent of its distribution. Lantana forms dense, impenetrable thickets that take over the native bushland and pastures. It competes for resources with the pastures and forestry plantations and reduces their productivity. Lantana infests forest edges, coastal zones, penetrates rainforests, and also invades eucalyptus woodland. Its dense thickets kill other plant species by smothering them and through the toxic effects they have on other plants. According to Dr. John Dearnaley (2008), senior lecturer in Plant Science in the University of Queensland, “Lantana is known to release chemicals that can suppress the growth of native plant species.” Estimates suggest that close to 120 native plants and animals in Queensland may be threatened by lantana (University of Queensland). The thickets also increase the intensity of wildfires by acting as readymade fuel. In agricultural areas, lantana invades pastures and grazing lands, cultivated lands, orchards, and riparian areas thereby increasing the production costs. It also obstructs access for machinery and livestock and is also one of the major factors in decreasing property values. In commercial forestry, lantana increases cost of production, increases risk of damage due to fire as it acts as fuel for fire and restricts access. One of the biggest problems and most serious problems with lantana is that it is highly toxic to livestock. Annual pastoral losses incurred in Queensland were estimated at $7.7 million, as a result of 1500 animal deaths due to toxic poisoning, reduction in productivity and loss of pastures. Additionally, control costs of lantana were also a major contributor to this loss. Furthermore lantana also infest and spreads onto roadsides, railway reserves, utility easements and unused land obstructing access and giving rise to control costs. In gardening also lantana causes an extensive amount of damage, thanks to its ability to cross-pollinate with other varieties of weeds to create new and more resilient species. Lantana is a serious threat to biodiversity in many World-Heritage listed areas in Australia including, Northern Queensland, Fraser Island and the Greater Blue Mountains. A large number of plant and animal species are threatened in these areas. Since its introduction into Australia as an ornamental plant in the 1840s, it has infested and affected four million hectares of eastern Australia starting from Victoria to northern Queensland and it has also spread into the Northern territory as well as Western Australia. It covers geographical areas starting from Eden in New South Wales, along the coast, all through Queensland up to Torres Strait Island. Lantana can grow in high rainfall areas with tropical and subtropical temperatures. It does not tolerate salty or dry soils, water logging or low temperatures. It thrives on rich, organic soils although it grows on well-drained clay and basalt soil (Natural Heritage Trust, 2003). Based on these weather conditions, namely, temperature, rainfall, soil, extreme seasons etc., it can be concluded that the potential distribution areas of Lantana may include Cape York, Northern Territory, Kimberly region, southern coats of Western Australia and Victoria. Legislation in Queensland requires landowners to reduce lantana infestations in many regions. The sale of lantana plants were banned in Queensland in 2003. All of the above observations and information and legislations passed by the Queensland government suggest that lantana is one of the biggest problems faced by farmers and agriculturalists in Queensland, where the lantana infestation is the highest. An extension plan addressing the problem of lantana infestation in Queensland farming and agricultural land is very essential. Although there is no one specific definition of extension, Black (2000), gives a two chosen definitions by the Australasia Pacific Extension Network and by Marsh and Pannell, both of which gives the purpose of extension. The Australasia Pacific Extension Network (1999) says that extension “involves the use of communication and adult education processes to help people and communities identify potential improvements to their practices, and then provides them with the skills and resources to effect these improvements.” Marsh and Pannell (1998), say the agricultural extension broadly includes, “public and private sector activities relating to technology transfer, education, attitude change, human resource development, and dissemination and collection of information.” From the above definitions it can be inferred that the main purpose of extension in essence is reaching out to communities and effecting planned change to practices through the introduction of new technologies. Russell et al (1989), give a simple equation of extension which suggests that the main purpose of extension is to transfer research knowledge to farmers who adopt and diffuse the knowledge provided to them. The equation starts with research which leads to knowledge, which then leads to transfer, which further leads to adoption, followed by diffusion. Hayward (1990), after studying the World Bank’s experience and approaches to extension concludes that extension projects increases the access of groups of farmers, specifically small-scale farmers to improved technology. 2. Geographical Area of Interest The geographical area of interest for this extension plan is south east Queensland. This is because the distribution of lantana is the maximum in this area. Although the distribution of lantana extends beyond the coast of Queensland, into the coast of New South Wales, the primary focus of this extension plan will be on the south east coast of Queensland. The infestation of lantana around this area covers more than four million hectares of land out of which a major portion is in Queensland alone. South east Queensland is highly infested with lantana. The climate, temperature and the rich organic soil in this area contributes to the high growth of lantana. In Queensland lantana has been reported at altitudes of up to 1000m. Lantana has been listed as the most significant weed by the South-East Queensland Environment Weeds Management Group. 3. Stakeholder Analysis Stakeholder Analysis is a technique used to identify and assess the importance of key people, groups of people or institutions that significantly influence the success of a given activity or project (Management Sciences for Health and UNICEF, 1998). Rietbergen-McCracken and Narayan (1998) define stakeholder analysis as a “methodology for identifying and analyzing the key stakeholders of a project and planning for their participation.” The stakeholder analysis answers the fundamental questions of whom the key stakeholders are, what their interests in the project are, how influential they are and which stakeholders are most important for the success of the project. This agricultural extension plan to deal with the problem of lantana weed in Queensland has a series of stakeholders each having varying levels of interest and influence on the project. Doing a stakeholder analysis will help identify the key stakeholders of this extension plan. The primary stakeholders of this extension plan from the industry groups would include farmers, landholders, owners of cultivated land and orchards, owners of extensive livestock, plantation owners etc. Other stakeholders include the Environmental Protection Agency in Queensland, the Forestry Department, Department of Main Roads (DMR) in Queensland, South-East Queensland Environment Weeds Management Group, Federal Government Agencies, Local governments and other environmental groups etc. Out of these stakeholders the industry groups such as farmers, landholders, livestock owners etc have high levels of interest but have low power. This group must be kept well informed of the extension plans. Furthermore many among this group will require consultation as part of the planning process. They must be informed and educated about the new and effective methods of controlling the infestation and distribution of lantana. This can be done by using effective strategies such as workshops and adult education programs which educate the farmers and landholders on the various methods of controlling lantana. Some members of this stakeholder group will also be a part of the extension team. The next group of stakeholders, namely the various government departments and ministries are those who have high interest levels and also have high levels of power. The various government departments are responsible for the approval of the project and its various subparts and also the financial aspect of the extension plan. It is important to win over this group of stakeholders and retain their interests for the plan to be successful. This can be done using various strategies such as meetings, presentations and evidence highlighting the damage lantana has caused so far and the importance of controlling the infestation and spreading of lantana in agricultural land, pastures, unused land as well as main roads and forest areas. The benefits of such an extension plan must be conveyed by showing losses incurred so far because of lantana infestation and the profits one can gain through increased productivity once the infestation has been controlled. This stakeholder group will form an important part of the extension team. Hence this extension plan will be a combined effort of all the stakeholders as opposed to being a singularly linear top down approach. It will be a combination a different models and strategies that will suit the current scenario. 4. Identifying the Target Groups Involved in the Extension Plan Targeting the extension plan towards a specific target group in need of this kind of extension plan in order to deal with the issue of lantana is very important. Farmers, landholders and livestock owners etc must be classified into different segments to ensure that the extension plan reaches each one of them and serves their needs accordingly. The various target groups for this extension plan involving the controlling of lantana weed includes, small, medium and large-scale farmers, small, medium and large landholders, livestock owners. The secondary targets include the Forestry Department and Department of Main Roads (DMR) in Queensland. The primary targets are further based on levels of learning regarding the issue at hand and technological background. The farmers, landholders, livestock owners etc are split into two categories, namely, farmers with little or no information and very little technological background on dealing with lantana and farmers with knowledge regarding the issue at hand and with a significant amount of technological background. This kind of stratification is done to meet the differing requirements of different target groups, using strategies that are most relevant to them. Targeting is done because different groups have different information needs, are at a different stage of learning and require interactions of a different manner. Hence the classification. The strategies that will be employed for farmers and landholders with little information on how to deal with the issue at hand and little technological background, will include workshops on information regarding the controlling of lantana and the technological methods that can be utilized, seminars and field days. A greater level of interaction will take place with this target group in order to convince them of the benefits of adopting such new technology and helping them understand the technological know how. Interaction will not be a linear top down approach. It will be a two way interaction done to understand the exact needs and requirements of the target group. For the second category, that is farmers with knowledge regarding the issue and with enough technological background, workshops will be conducted to introduce the new technologies that can be used to control the spread of lantana. Lesser effort needs to be taken for this group to convince them on the benefits of adopting new technologies as they already possess a reasonable technological background. This will also be a two way interaction as meaningful insight regarding how to improve current processes can be gained through these interactions. According to Roling (1998), most of the extension services are focused upon resource-rich farmers. Reaching other categories of farmers requires special efforts, a different approach and not just a modification of extension field methods. It requires targeting of extension and of research and input packages and credit and price policies. Roling presents five points of argument for and against targeting, all of which have the basic underlying principle that extension plans must be focused on resource rich areas, towards larger scale farmers having access to more resources. The first point is the inescapable calculus which concludes that every effort should be taken to develop technologies that will increase the yield per hectare and to promote the utilization of available technologies with all possible means. This implies that it is best to invest scare resources in high potential areas and large farms to gain better yield, as opposed to investing in small farms that are not capable of producing much for market consumption. The next point concerns export and efficiency. Exporting agricultural products requires high levels of efficiency and competitive pricing and quality. Continuous research is required to maintain competitive edge. Hence this argument states that inefficient producers must be weeded out and extension plans must extend only towards efficient producers. The third point argues that the national resources which are scarce must be used where there is economic return on capital and that it is unwise to invest scarce government and national resources on small farmers who use land largely for their own sustenance. The fourth point, i.e. minimizing environmental costs argues that high-tech agriculture is better from an environmental point of view as it requires less destruction of per unit of output than low-tech agriculture. The last point is the scientific imperative which says that in most successful agricultural development mere Transfer of Technology alone is not operative. It says that in these systems the user has been active as opposed to passive, wielding considerable control, exerting pressure, developing technology himself and adapting to it. This kind of system is possible only in large scale farms with greater access to resources. Roling also proposes five points of argument in favour of targeting. The first point is that targeting takes into account the sheer magnitude of the number of small scale rural farmers whose livelihood depends on their lands. It recognizes the magnitude of small farmer problem. Secondly, targeting recognizes the new role of women in agriculture and also recognizes the importance of the roles they play and identifies that neglect in development interventions in this area is a major reason for the failure of plans. Women can be considered as a target for extension plans. Thirdly, targeting contributes to the possible acceleration in marginalization. The fourth point is the validity of the export argument and Malthusian calculus. This point says that the problems of hunger, malnutrition and sale of surplus production can be solved by providing better income earning opportunities for small farmers to increase their purchasing power. This can be achieved by targeting. Lastly targeting facilitates the holding ground approach. The holding ground approach slows down the technology propelled development that outs small farmers out of business and creates as many livelihoods for as possible for labourers and small farmers. 5. Identification of Target Group Needs The primary need of the all the target groups is the controlling of the fast distribution of lantana weed by getting rid of existing plants in their farms and fields. Dealing with the problem of lantana weeds is the underlying problem of all target groups. However, individual target groups require attention in certain specific areas. For instance, the group of farmers and landholders with relatively limited knowledge on how to deal with lantana and low exposure to technology require more concentration with reference to convincing and educating them on the issue as well as the new technology that is available. Their information needs are greater and hence they require more intensive education and training programs through workshops and seminars. The second target group, namely the farmers who have knowledge on the issue at hand and have a reasonable exposure to technology require less concentration on basic education. They require only training as far as the new technology that is available for their use. They require less intensive seminars and workshops as they already have a considerable experience in trying out new technologies. Since both target groups have differing needs with respect to information requirements and are at a different stage of learning, the approaches of the extension plan to satisfy these needs would differ. 6. Analysis of Constraints There are some significant constraints and potential barriers to achieving the objectives of the extension plan. The barriers and constraints are classified into macro constraints and institutional constraints (Peterson, 1997). The first macro constraint is the agroecological constraint. The natural environment strongly influences extension planning. Extension planning needs to respond to the needs of many farmers from different agroecological zones. Hence one of the primary constraints of this extension plan is difficult choices that have to be made to meet the diverse information and technology needs from a wide geographical area. Unfavourable political-economic environment is another barrier. If the country is at the wrong stage of economic development and the levels of government investment in the extension plan is low, the plan could suffer a major setback. Politics also has a major role to play. Political shifts at the national level at the time of implementation can hinder the progress of the extension plan. The sociocultural barrier is another constraint in the implementation of the extension plan. Language barriers and illiteracy can impede the transfer of information regarding improved technology, thus hindering the extension plan. Cultural differences among farmers and also differential levels of available resources can also be a significant barrier. The policy component of an agricultural technology system is a next factor that has the capability to limit the reach of the extension plan. The main barriers in this context include price signals to farmers and the decision made by the government regarding extension. Poor infrastructure is also another primary barrier. Poor transport, communication and marketing facilities can hinder the capacity to move people, technology and other inputs and the sending and receiving of information. The Institutional barriers include Research, Education and Training and Input Supply. Agricultural research organizations are the closest institutional partners with respect to technology generation and transfer. Poor linkages between research and extension plans are a major institutional constraint. Educational organizations which train farmers and other people are most vital to an extension plan. Lack of staff members and inadequate qualifications can be a detrimental factor. Lastly inadequate access to inputs to increase production can be an impeding factor. Although the root cause of this is poor infrastructure, some problems can be addressed by proper planning and extension. 7. Extension Goal The primary extension goal is to control the distribution of lantana weed in fields, farms, pastoral lands and unoccupied lands. The goal of the extension plan is also to get rid of existing lantana in the areas mentioned and to prevent future growth in order to increase productivity and cut down on losses incurred due to lantana distribution and poisoning. 8. Objectives Increasing awareness on the effects on lantana and the importance of controlling its fast distribution. To stress on the importance of adopting new technology to tackle this issue. To bring about an increase in knowledge among farmers Encourage farmers to set aside a portion of the money and resources available to them to tackle this growing issue of lantana distribution. Educating them on the most effective way of dealing with the problem 9. Strategies Three main strategies will be utilized to meet the differing needs of farmers. First is the Paired-Paddock Model. This model consisted of farmers establishing twin paddocks in their own farms to compare productivity pastures with their existing pastures. The same principle can be applied in this extension plan which aims to control the spread of lantana. The primary reason for the success of the Paired paddock model is the direct comparison of the new and old production systems, which acted as a witness factor. Additionally this happens in the farms of a group of farmers each being a witness for the other. Other factors such as the facilitator, supportive group structure and skill acquisition were also the reason for its success (Trompf and Sale, 2000). This strategy will be utilized to demonstrate the benefits and success of new technologies. In order to educate the farmers and pass on knowledge regarding technology a formal or structured education and training program will be used. This is because Australian farmers have lower levels of education as they are reluctant to take on formal education as it is time consuming. However studies show that they are willing to undertake planned and structured learning activities concerning farming and its practices as it is relatively time consuming. However despite such a structured training activity, the strategy will not be a strictly linear top down approach. Instead a participatory bottom-up approach will be used. This is done in order to give priority to the problems and issues faced by farmers and farm families. Farm will be the main focus as opposed to research. 10. The Actions For the structured education and training activity, seminars and workshops will be conducted for the first three or four months to ensure that they gain the levels of necessary knowledge. For the paired paddock system field days will be used over a period of 6 months to enable framers to view the results of the action. The participatory bottom-up approach will be used through out the extension plan to enable easy identification of the issues and problems faced by farmers. 11. Monitoring and Evaluation For an extension plan to be successful and effective it needs to be closely monitored. It needs an administrative feedback system that can measure the progress and identify problems before they escalate. An effective monitoring system would be a Monitoring and Evaluation unit (M & E), that functions independently from the extension system and reports directly to the director of the extension plan. Most M & Es are installed in new or strong extension systems through donor financing. An effective M & E unit is essential for the success of the extension plan (Swanson et al., 1990). References Trompf, J P and Sale, P W G (2000). The Paired Paddock Model as an Agent for Change on Grazing Properties Across South-East Australia. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture. No.40. p 547- 556 Black, A W (2000). Extension theory and Practice: A Review. Centre for Social Care Research. Edith Cowan University. Swanson, B E & Farner, B J & Bahal, R (1990). The Current Status of Agricultural Extension Worldwide. Hayward, J A (1990). Agricultural Extension: The World Bank’s Experience and Approaches. The World Bank. Roling (1998). Targeting the Agricultural Information System. Russell et al (1989). Why Do Farmers Do What They Do. Farming Systems Support Project Newsletter. Vol. 2. No.1 Natural Heritage Trust (2003). Lantana Camara: The Weed Management Guide. Department of the Environment and Heritage and the CRC for Australian Weed Management. Retrieved July 31, 2009. http://www.weeds.gov.au/publications/guidelines/wons/l-camara.html Australian Weeds Committee (1999-2004). Lantana Control and Management Manual. Weeds of National Significance. Retrieved July 31, 2009. http://www.weeds.org.au/WoNS/lantana/ MSH and UNICEf (1998). Stakeholder Analysis. The Guide to Managing for Quality. Retrieved July 31, 2009. http://erc.msh.org/quality/ittools/itstkan.cfm Rietbergen-McCracken, J and Narayan, D (1998). Participation and Social Assessment: Tools and Techniques. Worldbank. Retrieved July 31, 2009. http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library/238582/Toolkit.pdf University of Southern Queensland. Study to Investigate the Effects of Lantana on Soil Biodiversity. News and Events. Retrieved July 31, 2009. http://www.usq.edu.au/newsevents/news/lantanastudy.htm Peterson, W (1997). Chapter 3: The Context of Extension in Agricultural and Rural Development. Improving Agricultural Extension: A Reference Manual. Retrieved July 31, 2009. http://www.fao.org/docrep/w5830e/w5830e05.htm#macro%20factors Read More

All of the above observations and information and legislations passed by the Queensland government suggest that lantana is one of the biggest problems faced by farmers and agriculturalists in Queensland, where the lantana infestation is the highest. An extension plan addressing the problem of lantana infestation in Queensland farming and agricultural land is very essential.  Although there is no one specific definition of extension, Black (2000), gives two chosen definitions by the Australasia Pacific Extension Network and by Marsh and Pannell, both of which give the purpose of the extension. The Australasia Pacific Extension Network (1999) says that extension “involves the use communication and adult education processes to help people and communities identify potential improvements to their practices, and then provides them with the skills and resources to effect these improvements.” Marsh and Pannell (1998), say the agricultural extension broadly includes, “public and private sector activities relating to technology transfer, education, attitude change, human resource development, and dissemination and collection of information.” From the above definitions, it can be inferred that the main purpose of extension in essence is reaching out to communities and effecting planned change to practices through the introduction of new technologies. Russell et al (1989), give a simple equation of extension which suggests that the main purpose of the extension is to transfer research knowledge to farmers who adopt and diffuse the knowledge provided to them. The equation starts with research which leads to knowledge, which then leads to transfer, which further leads to adoption, followed by diffusion. Hayward (1990), after studying the World Bank’s experience and approaches to extension concludes that extension projects increase the access of groups of farmers, specifically small-scale farmers to improved technology.

The geographical area of interest for this extension plan is southeast Queensland. This is because the distribution of lantana is the maximum in this area. Although the distribution of lantana extends beyond the coast of Queensland, into the coast of New South Wales, the primary focus of this extension plan will be on the southeast coast of Queensland. The infestation of lantana around this area covers more than four million hectares of land out of which a major portion is in Queensland alone. Southeast Queensland is highly infested with lantana. The climate, temperature, and the rich organic soil in this area contribute to the high growth of lantana. In Queensland lantana has been reported at altitudes of up to 1000m. Lantana has been listed as the most significant weed by the South-East Queensland Environment Weeds Management Group.

Stakeholder Analysis is a technique used to identify and assess the importance of key people, groups of people, or institutions that significantly influence the success of a given activity or project (Management Sciences for Health and UNICEF, 1998). Rietbergen-McCracken and Narayan (1998) define stakeholder analysis as a “methodology for identifying and analyzing the key stakeholders of a project and planning for their participation.” The stakeholder analysis answers the fundamental questions of whom the key stakeholders are, what their interests in the project are, how influential they are, and which stakeholders are most important for the success of the project. This agricultural extension plan to deal with the problem of lantana weed in Queensland has a series of stakeholders each having varying levels of interest and influence on the project. Doing a stakeholder analysis will help identify the key stakeholders of this extension plan.

The primary stakeholders of this extension plan from the industry groups would include farmers, landholders, owners of cultivated land and orchards, owners of extensive livestock, plantation owners, etc. Other stakeholders include the Environmental Protection Agency in Queensland, the Forestry Department, Department of Main Roads (DMR) in Queensland, South-East Queensland Environment Weeds Management Group, Federal Government Agencies, Local Governments, and other environmental groups, etc.

Read More