Early paradigms of agricultural extension were characterized by a linear model of technology transfer, where innovations developed by researchers were passed down to farmers without much input from them. Farmers were considered passive recipients.

Evolution over time:

• Adoption and diffusion models emerged, highlighting the importance of social networks in spreading agricultural innovations.
• Participatory approaches gradually replaced top-down methods, with farmers becoming central in the design and implementation of extension activities.
• The paradigm has now shifted towards sustainable development, which integrates environmental sustainability, economic viability, and social equity.
• There is also an increased recognition of indigenous knowledge systems and their role in agricultural development.
• This historical evolution reflects broader shifts towards inclusivity and socio-economic development in rural communities.

• Linear technology transfer: Agricultural technologies are developed in research institutions and transferred directly to farmers without much adaptation to local contexts.
• Extension agents as intermediaries: These agents serve as the bridge between researchers and farmers, relaying information and innovations.
• Focus on adoption rates: Success is often measured by how quickly and widely technologies are adopted by farmers.
• Research-driven innovation: Innovations are typically created by academic and government research institutions, with limited input from farmers.
• Training and demonstrations: These are used to show farmers how to apply new technologies.
• Farmers as passive recipients: The model often views farmers as users of knowledge rather than contributors to its development.
• Limited feedback loop: This model often lacks mechanisms for feedback from farmers to researchers, limiting its adaptability.

• Stages of adoption: The model outlines stages such as awareness, interest, evaluation, trial, and adoption.
• Social networks' role: Opinion leaders and social groups within farming communities significantly influence the adoption process.
• Diffusion over time: Innovations are communicated through formal and informal channels, gradually spreading through a social system.
• Barriers to adoption: Economic, social, and cultural factors may prevent some farmers from adopting innovations.
• Facilitators of adoption: Access to resources, effective communication, and support from extension services can speed up the adoption process.
• Socio-economic impact: The model considers how socio-economic status, education, and access to information affect the likelihood of adoption.
• Feedback loops: The diffusion process can create feedback loops that influence future innovation dissemination.

• Paradigm extension refers to the overarching frameworks, principles, and models that guide the practice of agricultural extension. It involves the development and evolution of theoretical perspectives and methodologies for delivering agricultural knowledge, skills, and technologies to farmers and rural communities.

  Significance:

  • Guides program design: Paradigms shape the way agricultural extension programs are structured and implemented, ensuring alignment with broader agricultural and social goals.
  • Adapts to changing contexts: Extension paradigms evolve in response to shifts in socio-economic, environmental, and cultural conditions, ensuring relevance and effectiveness.
  • Improves knowledge dissemination: Ensures that modern, innovative methods for spreading agricultural knowledge and technologies are employed.
  • Promotes sustainable agriculture: Paradigm shifts often lead to the integration of sustainable practices, balancing productivity with conservation.
  • Empowers farmers: Encourages participatory approaches where farmers become active agents in their development.
  • Reflects societal changes: As rural sociology evolves, paradigms adjust to include more inclusive and holistic agricultural practices.

Participatory Approaches:

• Bottom-up decision making: Farmers and local communities are actively involved in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of extension programs.
• Active farmer involvement: Farmers are seen as equal partners, contributing to the development and refinement of agricultural practices.
• Indigenous knowledge: The model values local traditions, knowledge, and environmental conditions in designing agricultural interventions.
• Context-specific solutions: Emphasis on solutions tailored to the specific socio-economic and environmental contexts of farmers.
• Farmer empowerment: Builds farmers' capacity to manage their agricultural development, leading to long-term sustainability.
• Collaboration among stakeholders: Extension workers, researchers, and farmers work together to co-create knowledge.

Technology Transfer Paradigm:

• Top-down approach: Agricultural innovations are developed by researchers and passed down to farmers with little adaptation.
• Passive farmer role: Farmers are considered recipients rather than co-creators of knowledge.
• Universal application of technologies: Technologies are often applied broadly without consideration for local differences.
• Success measured by adoption rates: The main indicator of success is how many farmers adopt a particular technology.
• Overlooks local knowledge: Indigenous practices and local needs are often ignored in favor of research-based solutions.
• One-way communication: Information flows from researchers to farmers, with limited feedback mechanisms.

The sustainable development paradigm integrates ecological, economic, and social dimensions of agriculture, aiming for long-term sustainability rather than short-term gains.

Importance:

• Environmental sustainability: Promotes farming practices that conserve natural resources and reduce environmental degradation.
• Economic viability: Encourages agricultural practices that increase productivity and profitability while ensuring long-term economic sustainability for farmers.
• Social equity: Aims to ensure that the benefits of agricultural development are distributed fairly, promoting inclusivity.
• Resilience to climate change: Helps farmers adapt to climate variability and other environmental challenges, improving the resilience of farming systems.
• Poverty reduction: Supports economic growth in rural areas by improving livelihoods and reducing poverty.
• Food security: Ensures that agricultural systems are productive enough to meet the growing food demands of the population while preserving ecosystems for future generations.
• Policy influence: Helps shape agricultural policies to encourage long-term sustainable practices and support rural development.

• • Power dynamics in rural communities: Paradigm shifts, such as the move from top-down to participatory approaches, have altered traditional power hierarchies, giving farmers more control over agricultural decision-making.
  • Community participation: Increased emphasis on community-led development has empowered farmers to actively participate in shaping agricultural policies and practices, leading to more inclusive agricultural systems.
  • Integration of diverse knowledge systems: Paradigm shifts have encouraged the incorporation of indigenous knowledge and local practices into formal agricultural extension systems, validating and enhancing the role of local expertise.
  • Shift from hierarchical to collaborative models: The transition from technology transfer to participatory approaches has fostered more collaboration between extension agents, researchers, and farmers, leading to better outcomes.
  • Social equity and justice: With the focus on sustainable and inclusive development, rural development efforts now place greater emphasis on ensuring that marginalized and disadvantaged groups benefit from agricultural innovations.
  • Farmer advocacy: Farmers have become more vocal and influential in advocating for agricultural policies that suit their unique needs, helping shape national and regional agricultural agendas.

• Linear transfer of technologies: Research institutions develop technologies that are then passed down to farmers with little or no modification.
• Extension agents as intermediaries: These agents act as the primary link between research organizations and farmers, facilitating the dissemination of agricultural innovations.
• Focus on adoption rates: The success of this model is often measured by how quickly and widely farmers adopt the technologies.
• Research-driven innovation: Technologies are developed primarily by academic or government institutions with minimal farmer input, relying on a one-size-fits-all approach.
• Farmers as passive recipients: In this paradigm, farmers are viewed as recipients who apply the innovations without actively contributing to their development.
• Emphasis on technology dissemination: The paradigm is concerned primarily with the widespread adoption of technologies, often without considering their suitability to local contexts or long-term sustainability.
• Lack of adaptability: This model assumes that what works in one region will work everywhere, often ignoring local differences in socio-economic conditions, environmental factors, and cultural practices.

• Assumes universal applicability of technologies: This model tends to overlook the fact that different regions have unique environmental, social, and economic conditions, which may render certain technologies ineffective or unsuitable.
• Ignores local knowledge: By relying solely on externally developed technologies, the model often dismisses the value of indigenous knowledge and practices that could enhance agricultural success in specific contexts.
• Limited farmer participation: Farmers are seen as passive recipients rather than active contributors, leading to lower buy-in and engagement in the extension process.
• Low adoption rates: Many technologies fail to gain widespread acceptance due to socio-economic barriers, such as high costs, lack of access to credit, or limited infrastructure.
• Sustainability concerns: The focus on short-term productivity gains can lead to the promotion of practices that may degrade natural resources or fail to consider long-term ecological sustainability.
• Socio-economic barriers: The model often overlooks barriers such as farmers' financial limitations, land tenure issues, and access to credit, making it difficult for small-scale farmers to adopt the proposed technologies.
• Minimal adaptation: Technologies are often introduced without sufficient tailoring to local needs, leading to suboptimal results and dissatisfaction among farmers.

• Facilitates knowledge sharing: Communication serves as the foundation for disseminating agricultural information, best practices, and innovations to rural communities.
• Multi-channel approach: The paradigm utilizes various communication channels, such as radio, television, mobile applications, social media, and face-to-face meetings, to reach different segments of the farming population.
• Behavioral change: Effective communication strategies aim to influence farmers' attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors towards adopting improved agricultural practices and technologies.
• Farmer participation: Encourages farmers to actively express their needs, preferences, and challenges, ensuring that extension services are tailored to their specific contexts.
• Interactive communication: Rather than simply transmitting information, this paradigm promotes two-way communication where farmers can ask questions, provide feedback, and engage in dialogue with extension workers and researchers.
• Customized interventions: Through effective communication, extension agents can design interventions that are relevant to the socio-economic conditions, education levels, and farming systems of the target population.
• Capacity building: Communication tools and platforms are used to enhance the skills of extension agents, enabling them to deliver more effective services to farmers.

• Active farmer involvement: Farmers and rural communities are central to the decision-making process, ensuring that agricultural interventions reflect their needs and priorities.
• Bottom-up decision-making: Unlike top-down models, participatory approaches involve community input from the start, leading to more context-appropriate solutions.
• Collaboration among stakeholders: Extension agents, farmers, researchers, and other stakeholders work together to co-create agricultural knowledge and solutions.
• Recognition of indigenous knowledge: Participatory approaches place value on local traditions, knowledge systems, and practices, integrating them with modern scientific knowledge.
• Context-specific solutions: Agricultural interventions are tailored to the local environmental, economic, and social conditions, increasing their effectiveness and sustainability.
• Farmer empowerment: Farmers are empowered to take charge of their agricultural development, leading to improved confidence, skills, and capacity to innovate.
• Capacity building: These approaches often involve training and knowledge-sharing to build the capacity of both farmers and extension workers.

Benefits:

• Holistic perspective: The systems approach considers the entire agricultural ecosystem, including crops, livestock, environmental factors, and social elements, leading to more integrated and sustainable solutions.
• Integrated solutions: Promotes the adoption of comprehensive solutions such as integrated pest management and agroforestry, which address multiple agricultural challenges at once.
• Climate resilience: Helps farmers build resilience to environmental challenges, such as climate change, through practices that improve soil health, water conservation, and biodiversity.
• Stakeholder engagement: The approach encourages collaboration among farmers, extension agents, researchers, policymakers, and other stakeholders to create well-rounded solutions.
• Supports sustainability: The focus on environmental, economic, and social factors ensures that agricultural systems remain productive in the long term.
• Data-driven decision-making: The approach promotes data collection, analysis, and feedback loops to continuously improve farming practices and extension services.

Challenges:

• Resource-intensive: Implementing the systems approach often requires significant investments in data collection, analysis, and stakeholder coordination.
• Complexity: The approach involves managing complex interactions between various components of the agricultural system, which can be difficult to coordinate.
• Collaboration difficulties: Diverse stakeholders, each with their own goals and perspectives, may face challenges in collaborating effectively.
• Scalability: The approach may be difficult to implement on a large scale due to variations in local contexts and resource availability.
• Training requirements: Extension agents and farmers need specialized training to understand and apply the principles of the systems approach effectively.
• Time-consuming: Due to the need for thorough analysis and planning, the systems approach can be slower to implement than simpler models.

Key aspects of the Sustainable Livelihoods Approach (SLA):

• Focus on livelihoods improvement: The primary goal is to enhance the overall well-being and livelihoods of rural communities by considering a variety of assets such as human, social, natural, physical, and financial capital.
• Asset-based framework: SLA emphasizes strengthening the five forms of capital (human, social, natural, physical, and financial) that contribute to household resilience and sustainability.
• Reduces vulnerability: The approach aims to reduce the vulnerability of rural populations to economic shocks, environmental disasters, and social stressors by promoting diversified livelihoods.
• Resilience building: By improving access to resources and developing multiple livelihood strategies, the approach helps communities become more resilient to environmental and economic changes.
• Inclusive development: It promotes social inclusion and equity, ensuring that marginalized groups (such as women, ethnic minorities, or the poor) are included in development efforts.
• Promotes long-term sustainability: The approach focuses on sustainable resource management and the balance between immediate needs and long-term environmental conservation.

Application:

• Identification of assets: An initial assessment identifies the strengths and assets of the community, including local resources and capacities.
• Leverages community strengths: Programs are designed to build upon these assets, rather than focusing solely on deficiencies or external solutions.
• Capacity building: Communities are empowered to manage their own resources more effectively and cope with external stresses.
• Social inclusion: Efforts are made to ensure that marginalized individuals and groups are included in development planning and decision-making processes.
• Adapts to local conditions: Programs are flexible and adapted to specific local contexts, making them more effective and sustainable over the long term.

Overview of the Innovation Systems Approach:

• This approach recognizes the complex and dynamic interactions among multiple actors—farmers, researchers, extension agents, private sector, and policymakers—that are involved in the innovation process.

Key elements:

• Multi-actor involvement: The approach encourages the participation of various stakeholders (researchers, extension agents, farmers, private companies) in creating and disseminating agricultural innovations.
• Knowledge sharing: Focuses on the creation, dissemination, and application of knowledge within a network of stakeholders.
• Networked collaboration: The approach fosters continuous learning and interaction among actors, promoting innovation and adaptation of agricultural practices.
• Institutional frameworks: It emphasizes the role of supportive policies and institutional arrangements in fostering innovation.
• Feedback mechanisms: Continuous feedback between stakeholders helps refine and adapt innovations to better suit local conditions.

Effectiveness:

• Promotes inclusivity: By involving multiple stakeholders, the approach ensures that innovations are more inclusive and reflective of the needs of different groups, particularly smallholder farmers.
• Enhances collaboration: The multi-stakeholder nature of the approach fosters collaboration and knowledge exchange, leading to more practical and context-specific innovations.
• Supports continuous adaptation: The dynamic nature of the innovation systems approach allows for ongoing learning and adaptation, making it more flexible in responding to emerging challenges.
• Policy and institutional support: The approach is effective in influencing policies and institutional frameworks that are crucial for scaling up innovations.

Challenges:

• Institutional fragmentation: Collaboration among diverse actors can be difficult to achieve, especially when institutional frameworks are not well developed.
• Resource demands: The approach often requires significant investment in resources, time, and coordination, making it difficult to scale in resource-poor settings.
• Policy environment dependency: The success of the innovation systems approach depends heavily on a conducive policy environment, which may not always exist in certain regions.

Technology transfer refers to the process through which innovations, practices, and technologies developed in research institutions are disseminated to farmers and other agricultural stakeholders for use in their production systems.

• High-yield crop varieties: Introduction of genetically improved or hybrid seeds that can produce higher yields per hectare.
• Mechanization: Transfer of agricultural machinery, such as tractors, plows, and harvesters, to improve the efficiency of farming operations and reduce labor intensity.
• Pest control methods: Dissemination of innovations such as chemical pesticides, biological pest control methods, and integrated pest management (IPM) strategies to reduce crop losses due to pests.
• Soil and water management techniques: Technologies for efficient irrigation, such as drip irrigation systems, water harvesting techniques, and soil conservation methods to improve water use efficiency and soil health.
• Improved irrigation systems: Technologies such as low-cost drip irrigation, sprinkler systems, and advanced irrigation management practices to optimize water use in farming.
• Disease-resistant livestock breeds: The introduction of livestock breeds that are more resistant to diseases, which helps improve animal productivity and reduce veterinary costs.
• Precision agriculture: Technologies that use sensors, GPS, and data analytics to optimize inputs (water, fertilizer, pesticides) and improve crop management.

Advantages:

• Increased productivity: The model has historically led to substantial increases in agricultural productivity and crop yields, contributing to food security.
• Farm efficiency: Technological innovations, such as mechanization and improved seeds, help farmers increase efficiency and reduce labor costs.
• Knowledge dissemination: The model helps transfer modern agricultural knowledge and practices from research institutions to farmers, accelerating innovation uptake.
• Economic development: Technology transfer can boost rural economies by increasing agricultural output, creating jobs, and improving farm incomes.
• Technological advancement: It promotes the introduction of cutting-edge technologies, such as biotechnology and precision farming, which can revolutionize agriculture.
• Capacity building: Farmers are often trained in modern practices, which improves their technical know-how and enhances long-term agricultural performance.

Limitations:

• One-size-fits-all approach: The technology transfer model often assumes that technologies developed in one region or context can be applied universally, which can result in failure when local conditions are ignored.
• Limited farmer input: Farmers are typically viewed as passive recipients, and their input in the innovation process is limited, which can lead to low adoption rates.
• Overlooks local knowledge: The model may overlook valuable indigenous knowledge and practices that could enhance the success of innovations.
• Socio-economic barriers: Many small-scale farmers face barriers such as lack of access to credit, high costs of technologies, or limited infrastructure, preventing them from adopting new innovations.
• Sustainability concerns: Some technologies transferred may not be environmentally sustainable, leading to soil degradation, water depletion, or other ecological issues.
• Low adoption rates: Due to the lack of adaptability and participation, farmers may resist adopting technologies that do not align with their needs or socio-economic realities.

• Participatory technology development: Involves farmers directly in the research and innovation process, ensuring that technologies are tailored to their specific needs and local conditions.
• Context-specific solutions: Focuses on developing solutions that are adapted to the environmental, social, and economic contexts of the target communities, rather than imposing a one-size-fits-all model.
• Integrated extension services: Combines technology transfer with advisory services, capacity building, and access to markets and financial services to ensure successful adoption and sustainability.
• Sustainability and conservation: Emphasis is now placed on transferring technologies that promote environmental sustainability, such as organic farming practices and climate-smart agriculture.
• Use of ICTs: Information and communication technologies (ICTs) such as mobile apps, radio, and social media are increasingly used to transfer agricultural knowledge and innovations to farmers in remote areas.
• Public-private partnerships: Collaboration between public institutions, private companies, and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) helps provide comprehensive support for farmers, including access to markets, financing, and post-adoption support.

Advisory services in agricultural extension refer to the provision of expert guidance, information, and technical support to farmers with the aim of improving agricultural practices and productivity.

Key features:

• Personalized guidance: Advisory services provide tailored advice to farmers based on their specific needs, crops, or livestock systems, ensuring that recommendations are relevant to local contexts.
• Expert knowledge: Extension agents and agricultural specialists with expertise in areas such as agronomy, animal husbandry, pest management, and soil health deliver accurate and up-to-date information.
• Information dissemination: Advisory services focus on delivering knowledge about best practices, new technologies, market trends, and government policies that can affect farming.
• Capacity building: Beyond offering advice, these services often include training sessions, workshops, and on-farm demonstrations to improve farmers' skills and competencies.
• Facilitation of decision-making: Advisors help farmers make informed decisions about crop choices, input use, water management, and other aspects of farm operations.
• Long-term support: Advisory services provide ongoing assistance to farmers, helping them address challenges over time and adapt to changing conditions, such as market fluctuations or climate change.
• Collaboration with stakeholders: Often, advisory services work with a range of actors, including government agencies, private sector partners, and research institutions, to offer comprehensive support to farmers.

• Field visits by extension agents: Extension workers visit farms to provide hands-on advice, monitor progress, and offer solutions to challenges faced by farmers.
• Farmer field schools (FFS): Group-based learning sessions where farmers are trained in new techniques and practices through practical, participatory approaches on demonstration plots.
• Hotlines and helpdesks: Farmers can access immediate assistance through telephone hotlines, allowing them to ask questions and receive real-time advice from experts.
• Printed materials: Brochures, manuals, leaflets, and booklets provide farmers with step-by-step guidance on agricultural techniques and innovations, offering a reference they can consult as needed.
• Digital platforms: Mobile apps, websites, and SMS services provide access to timely information, market prices, weather forecasts, and best practices for farmers in even remote areas.
• Workshops and seminars: Group events organized for knowledge sharing, where farmers, extension agents, and other stakeholders exchange ideas and learn from each other's experiences.
• Demonstration plots: Practical, on-farm demonstrations showcase new technologies or methods in real-time, allowing farmers to see the benefits firsthand before adopting them.

• Enhances service delivery: Well-trained extension personnel can offer more effective and relevant advice to farmers, improving the overall impact of extension programs.
• Builds technical and managerial skills: HRD ensures that extension workers have the latest technical knowledge in areas like crop management, soil health, and pest control, as well as managerial skills such as planning and program implementation.
• Promotes continuous learning: HRD encourages lifelong learning and adaptation to new challenges in agriculture, such as climate change, emerging pests, or shifts in market demand.
• Supports sustainable practices: Through training and capacity building, HRD equips farmers with the skills to adopt and maintain sustainable farming practices that promote long-term productivity and environmental conservation.
• Contributes to rural development: By improving the effectiveness of agricultural extension services, HRD plays a key role in rural economic growth, poverty reduction, and food security.
• Increases innovation capacity: HRD fosters creativity and innovation among both extension agents and farmers, enabling them to experiment with new technologies and practices.
• Builds resilience: Training programs help farmers and extension workers develop the capacity to manage risks, such as extreme weather events or market fluctuations, making agricultural systems more resilient.

• Technical training programs: Extension workers and farmers receive hands-on training in modern agricultural practices, such as precision agriculture, integrated pest management (IPM), or organic farming.
• Leadership development programs: Extension personnel, community leaders, and farmer group representatives are trained in leadership skills, helping them take on managerial and decision-making roles in agricultural development.
• Workshops and seminars: These events provide opportunities for knowledge exchange, professional development, and networking among agricultural stakeholders.
• Field demonstrations: HRD initiatives often include practical field demonstrations where extension agents and farmers can learn about and apply new techniques or technologies.
• E-learning platforms: Online courses, webinars, and virtual training sessions offer extension workers and farmers the opportunity to improve their skills and knowledge remotely.
• On-the-job training: Extension workers may receive additional training while performing their regular duties, allowing them to continuously develop their skills in real-world settings.
• Peer learning and exchange visits: Farmers and extension agents visit other regions or countries to learn from successful agricultural practices and innovations in different contexts.

• Limited financial resources: HRD programs often require significant funding for training materials, expert trainers, infrastructure, and travel, making them difficult to sustain in resource-poor settings.
• Infrastructural limitations: Remote areas may lack the facilities, equipment, and digital infrastructure needed to deliver high-quality training, limiting access to HRD opportunities.
• Access issues in rural areas: Farmers and extension workers in remote or underserved regions may struggle to access HRD programs due to distance, poor transportation networks, or communication barriers.
• Retention of trained personnel: Extension agents and other trained professionals may leave rural areas for better-paying jobs in urban centers or other sectors, resulting in a loss of expertise.
• Adapting programs to local needs: HRD programs are often designed without sufficient consideration of the specific socio-economic, cultural, and environmental contexts of the target audience, reducing their relevance and effectiveness.
• Continuous learning and career development: Ensuring that extension workers and farmers have access to ongoing learning opportunities, rather than one-off training sessions, remains a significant challenge.
• Coordination among stakeholders: Effective HRD often requires collaboration between government agencies, research institutions, NGOs, and private sector actors, which can be difficult to achieve due to conflicting priorities and agendas.

• Participatory decision-making: Farmers are actively involved in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of agricultural programs, ensuring that interventions are relevant to their needs.
• Capacity building: Extension services focus on building farmers’ skills and knowledge, empowering them to manage their resources, adopt new technologies, and make better farming decisions.
• Access to resources and information: Farmers are provided with the tools, knowledge, and financial resources they need to improve their agricultural productivity and resilience.
• Encouraging collective action: Empowerment often involves fostering group-based initiatives, such as farmer cooperatives or producer groups, to increase bargaining power and access to markets.
• Supporting networks: Building networks among farmers, extension workers, researchers, and other stakeholders creates a supportive environment where farmers can share experiences and learn from each other.
• Leadership development: Farmers are trained in leadership and organizational skills, helping them take on roles within their communities and advocate for their interests in policy-making processes.
• Continuous feedback: Empowerment includes the creation of feedback mechanisms where farmers can voice their concerns and suggestions, leading to the continuous improvement of agricultural extension services.

• Use of ICT (Information and Communication Technologies): ICT tools, such as mobile apps and SMS services, are increasingly used to provide real-time information and facilitate two-way communication between farmers and extension workers. This enables farmers to access information on weather, markets, and best practices at their convenience.
• Inclusive approaches: More attention is being given to marginalized groups, such as women, youth, and ethnic minorities, ensuring that they are included in decision-making processes and benefit from agricultural programs.
• Community-led initiatives: Empowerment programs are increasingly designed to allow communities to lead their own agricultural initiatives, with external actors providing support only where necessary. This enhances local ownership and sustainability.
• Linking farmers to markets and credit: New approaches focus not just on improving productivity but also on ensuring that farmers can access markets and financial services, enabling them to profit from their efforts and invest in further improvements.
• Policy advocacy: Empowerment initiatives are increasingly targeting broader policy change, helping farmers advocate for supportive regulations, access to land, and other resources needed for agricultural success.
• Building farmer capacity for innovation: Farmers are being trained not just to adopt existing technologies but also to experiment and innovate, enabling them to adapt to changing conditions and new challenges, such as climate change.