Premium
The present and future of public sector extension in Africa: contracting out or contracting in?
Author(s) -
Anderson Jon,
Van Crowder L.
Publication year - 2000
Publication title -
public administration and development
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.574
H-Index - 44
eISSN - 1099-162X
pISSN - 0271-2075
DOI - 10.1002/pad.149
Subject(s) - public sector , private sector , equity (law) , private investment in public equity , public good , business , extension (predicate logic) , public economics , agricultural extension , economics , agriculture , finance , economic growth , private equity fund , political science , private equity , economy , ecology , programming language , computer science , law , biology , microeconomics
Public sector extension has come under increasing pressure to downsize and reform. Contracting out—the use of public sector funds to contract non‐governmental and private service providers—is often held up as a potential tool in reform efforts. Much has been written about the possible advantages of contracting out of agricultural extension and it is being encouraged and promoted by numerous international organizations. However, a look at field experience in Africa shows that contracting out is relatively infrequent, especially compared with the reverse—contracting in—where private sector and non‐governmental organizations finance public sector extension delivery. Case studies from Uganda and Mozambique indicate that on the ground attempts to come up with solutions to providing services to farmers are resulting in innovative contracting approaches and combined public and private institutional arrangements. Contracting in and public–private coalition approaches, in contrast to purely public sector extension (characterized by ineffectiveness and inefficiencies) and purely private for profit extension (which may ignore public goods and concerns), may help achieve extension services which are both demand led and which internalize public concerns such as environmental protection, food security and socio‐economic equity. These coalition approaches can be improved and facilitated. They deserve greater analysis and may contribute to a better understanding of extension contracting and the roles of private and public organizations. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.