Professor Rick Roush Australian Council of Deans of Agriculture Melbourne School of Land and Environment University of Melbourne ACDA The Future of Agricultural Extension by Australian Universities

 “Traditionally”, expert authorities passing along facts, knowledge, wisdom  More recently, knowledge partnerships based on joint inquiry

 Relatively low contributions by Universities currently and why  Plausible lessons from the US Land Grant University System  Possible actions

Source: ABS % expenditure 1996/97 $1099m 2006/07 $1716m

There are long lags between research discovery and take-up by farmers Source: D’Emden et al. (2006) Technological forecasting and Social Change, 73: No-till in Southern Australia

GE corn Hybrid corn 19 years13 yrs

 Even good ideas take time, even with strong evidence of performance  Typically, there are “champions” in the research or farm organisations who develop over years a close working relationship with the farming community and continue to promote the idea(s)  Risk is the lost opportunity cost of delays in adoption or failure to adopt at all

 Universities lose money on research!  Cutler Review (2008) of the National Innovation System: “Adopt the principle of fully funding the costs of university research activities”  University of Melbourne: About $700M invested in Research from $400M funded ACDA

 Staff and administrative focus has to be on teaching; most university promotion based on research and teaching (some on knowledge transfer now at U of Melbourne)  Once the grant runs out, not only is there little incentive for extension, there is no funding even for costs like travel ACDA

Source: ABS % expenditure 1996/97 $1099m 2006/07 $1716m

State Govt OtherCSIROUniver- sity Total 19 (53%) 10 (28%) 5 (14%) 2 (6%) 36 “a significant contribution to communicating the outcomes of research”.

 Not quite moribund, but not obviously reaching the potential implied by the roughly 20% of research funding and unique expertise  University staff are especially aligned with teaching and establishing a rapport with much of the next generation of agriculturalists  Asset and opportunity lost, especially with decline of state activity?? ACDA

 From 1862 (Hatch Act), state grants of land  Smith-Lever Act of 1914 established Cooperative Extension Service (Federal and State authorities cooperating)  Many academics have joint Extension/Research/Teaching Appointments, even across USDA and state agencies  Very successful; relationships established with students often continue for decades, linking Unis to the field adoption

 Funded in part by USDA at about $ 1 Billion annually, mostly on statutory formula with mandatory and public reporting  Funds typically used for base operating support, including travel, etc.  Scaled to Australia at 1/15 the size, about $67M; would likely offer modest budget surplus to ag schools across Australia  Typically also some state govt $$ support

Declining graduate numbers ACDA

 Universities under-performing compared to research grant success and knowledge capital  US Land Grant University System much more effective; linked in to funding, research and future land managers

 Reinvest in Universities to help fill the gap of knowledge partnerships: allow public and ag industry to reap full benefits of agricultural research investment by all parties, but probably especially in the “public good”  Fund by formula directly to Ag Faculties and Schools based on numbers of academics on continuing appointments with ag focus, from public funds committed to RDCs

