國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Chapter 1: Introduction Background
The Association of South-East Asia Nations is a regional organization of countries with ten members: Brunei, Myanmar, Singapore, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam. Although heterogeneous, this community was created in order to cultivate common goals that will strengthen the region to face a world that is getting more and more competitive by the day, and to improve its own capacities to reach a high economic, social and political development (ASEAN, 2009).
In the recent past years, growth in the ASEAN region has been stable at high levels. For instance, for the period between 1984 and 2007, the average of growth for nine of the countries has been 5.93%, whilst the average growth for most members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), was only 2.77% (Siddique, 2011). Between 2011 and 2015, the OECD predicts an average growth of 6.1% taking into account the positive performance of six countries such as:
Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam (OECD, 2010).
Still, the Association of South-East Asia Nations ASEAN remains largely an agrarian region with 40-70% of its labor force engaged in agriculture with many of its regions still under-developed in aspects of infrastructure, services (health care and education), science and technology (ASEAN, 2009). In fact, while the percentage of rural Asians who are poor has decreased substantially during the last decades, more than one third of rural population still lives in extreme poverty (Asian Development
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Bank, 2011).
Agriculture is therefore a vital part of the ASEAN economy, and is likely to remain so for the time being. Its ongoing viability however depends on having a well-qualified workforce at all levels of the agricultural cycle. It is no doubt that agricultural knowledge systems play a central role in this development because it increases economic opportunities for farmers, food security for the general population and contributes generously to environmental sustainability (ASEAN, 2009). However, for many years, the conventional approach to agriculture contributed to a negative image and created the perception that a career in agriculture is not attractive. This is now changing because even commercial agricultural sectors have an entrusted interest in promoting careers in the field in order to address the constraint of low work force (Patley, Quarter 2008), and at the same time drives a new path enabling an agriculture responding to a sustainable development.
From this perspective, the researcher relies on the definition established by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) for
“sustainable agriculture”:
[A]n integrated system of plant and animal production practices having site-specific application that will over the long-term:
- Satisfy human food and fiber needs.
- Enhance environmental quality and the natural resource base upon which the agricultural economy depends.
- Make the most efficient use of non-renewable resources and on-farm resources and integrate, where appropriate, natural biological cycles and controls.
- Sustain the economic viability of farm operations.
- Enhance the quality of life for farmers and society as a whole.
Source: Farm Bill 1990 (Title XVI, Subtitle A, Sec. 1603) (UNESCO, 2010)
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
The world community is finally recognizing the meaning of the emerging bio- economy for world food and energy security, and how this development in our agricultural system can be achieved more sustainably. It is not an exaggeration to observe that the world’s stability depends on reliable supplies and stable prices for food and bio-energy, on the preservation of natural resources strengthening all economic activities, and on a radical change of the current model of way of life contributing to rural development, in the long term (Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources, 2009).
On the search of a new path for improvement, the Asian Development Bank notes that there are three important goals- growth, poverty reduction and environmental sustainability that are now part of government policies and strategies in the region (ADB, 2000). In the specific case of the ASEAN, the ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC) aims to focus on the following commitments: “(a) Human Development; (b) Social Welfare and Protection; (c) Social Justice and Rights; (d) Ensuring Environmental Sustainability (e) Building the ASEAN Identity;
and (f) Narrowing the Development Gap” (ASEAN, 2009, p. 15). Therefore, this research will focus on two of the goals of ASCC, which are ‘human development through education’ and ‘ensuring environmental sustainability’. Moreover, in addition to multilateral commitments such as the Millennium Development Goals, there is also an ASEAN contribution to the implementation of the UN Decade on Education for Sustainable Development 2005-2014. ASEAN promotes “sustainable development through environmental education and public participation” it has a strategic objective of “establishing with the rhythm and harmony of nature, with citizens who are
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
capable to ensure the sustainable development of the region through environmental education” (ASEAN, 2009, p. 17)
Therefore, it is essential to link human resources capacity building and environment sustainability, which also impacts food security, food safety, the general fight against poverty, and integrate the review and improvement of traditional agriculture methods, research on new technologies and building human resource capacity through formal or non-formal education (Villareal, 2002).
First, as established Deborah Eade in 1997, human resource as a form of capital is not new, but it has only recently been incorporated into the stream of economic and development thought. She further emphasizes that the main component of overall development efforts must be capacity building, particularly investments in human capital (Eade, 1997). In line with this paper, this refers to the building of capacities of people who actually depend on, as well as drive the agriculture sector.
Secondly, living through a world of globalization, agricultural crisis and other failures nowadays, are considered as not problems of an individual country, rather these are considered as regional- globalized problems. The role of agricultural universities and institutes is therefore very important and goes beyond solving the problems faced by the people engaged in agricultural activities. Suitable and necessary modifications in the course curriculum, research programming and extension activities related to agricultural education should be made to address these globalized problems (Chakrabati, 2010).
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Furthermore, as basic education, higher education is also important in order to specialize. As Hoffman once mentioned:
[T]here are few countries in the world that can afford the establishment and maintenance of specialized educational and research centers covering the entire range of disciplines directly and indirectly concerned with agricultural and rural development. Poorer countries and those with varied ecological conditions have to depend to a large extent on opportunities for specializing training abroad (IRRI, 1985, p. 5)
For example, the first of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) center was the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in the Philippines. The goal of the IRRI is to improve the well being of present and future generations of rice farmers and consumers, particularly those with low incomes, by generating and disseminating rice-related knowledge and technology. It is important to remind that Member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) play a major role in the global rice market. Over the next decade, the ASEAN region is projected to account for 53% of net exports, 14% of net imports, 29% of harvested area, 25% of total production, and 22% of total rice consumption (Wailes & Chavez, 2012). Rice is the major food staple in ASEAN countries and thus plays a significant role in the food security concerns of the region. Moreover, with an expected increase in population in the next 20 years, rice production must be increased to 690 million tons (Van Nguyen, 2008). IRRI's contributions to the development and implementation of hybrid rice, a new rice plant type, perennial upland rice, sharing of rice genetic resources, training farmers to save seed, and many
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
other activities will go a long way in reaching the goal of having sufficient rice in Asia for the future (Whigham, 2003).
Additionally, on the continent, the contribution the Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA) and other institutions in fostering postgraduate and special training programs open to students from various countries has been outstanding, and the trend to broaden the institutional base by making use of first-class facilities in a large range of universities and colleges in the region is to be encouraged (IRRI, 1985). Specifically, the Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA), an intergovernmental organization under the Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization (SEAMEO), has been supporting the development of capabilities of institutions for sustainable and inclusive agriculture and rural development in Southeast Agricultural education and can be said is at the crossroads in the world and in Asia (Patley, Quarter 2008). Even though, SEARCA is not a formal higher-education institution, it plays the role of advisor of different universities’ agriculture programs in the region and contributes through trainings and providing extension programs to professionals in order to spread an up-to-date knowledge in tone with the current needs of Society.
Research motivation
The motivation of this study is based upon several reasons as it is intended to work on the linkage between higher- education, agriculture and global issues. First, the recent farmer’s protests movement in Colombia was the starting point of selecting this research topic within others. Colombia, a developing country like many others in
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Southeast Asia, has its farmers as some of the most vulnerable members of society for decades. This group of people is paying the consequences for the country’s fast-changing economy. In Colombia, sixty percent of rural people live in extreme poverty and are now directly affected by seventeen free- trade agreements signed with foreign countries or regions. For instance, the most controversial are being the ones signed with the European Union (EU) and most recently with the United- States (US). The EU and the US, with capabilities such as extension techniques, technological advancement and production performance, possess almost unrivaled agricultural sectors. These free trade arrangements are making it almost impossible to compete with cheaper imports from these developed regions erected as global specialists on agriculture (Joseph, 2013).
Secondly, the researcher is interested in analyzing the different notions of
“development”, with one focused on production performance following neoliberal policies; and the other, related with social development (fairness and wellness for rural sector) from the sustainable agricultural perspective. Farmer’s movements in Colombia are related with international issues, as agriculture is directly affected by the current neoliberal policy agenda, which includes the reduction of trade barriers and deregulate national economies, resulting to a more complex and globalized agro-food system, and promoting the involvement of transnational corporations in the sector, competing with middle-small land farmers in the global sphere (Tonts &
Siddique, 2011). Moreover, despite certain different heritages and cultures, Latin American and South-East Asian agrarian structures have lot of similarities, like the basic objective of peasants in these countries is: survival. Here the farmer cultivates a
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
to meet his and his family's minimal needs (Economics Concepts, 2012). Again, in these countries farmers get nominal and sub-standard wages by working as tenants.
Such peasants can hardly aspire for profits, which depend upon climatic conditions or market conditions.
Opposite to Europe and US farmers, who are totally integrated in the agriculture production-supply chain and having high earnings through extensive agriculture, the farmers in South- East Asian countries and most of the countries in Latin America are born in debt, grow in debt and die in debt. This is the most common and natural destiny of the farmers. These poor tillers depend in most cases, upon animal and human power, rather than tools and machinery. They use excrement rather than chemical fertilizers. They are bound to use the traditional seeds and crops rather than experimental cultivations. Here the farmers do not have any insurance laws, unemployment allowances or social security measures. In Latin America, in South-East Asia and Africa, agrarian structures are not only part of production system but also a basic feature of the entire economic social and political organization of rural life (Economics Concepts, 2012). That is why this research, even if focused on ASEAN region, would also inspire and contribute to Latin- American development improvements in this important field.
Finally, the field of agriculture in higher- education is as well connected with the former position of the researcher in the second biggest public university of Colombia- Universidad de Antioquia, at the International Affairs Office. There, the researcher had the opportunity to participate in the initiation of a PhD program in ecology in partnership with the Latin-American Scientific Society of
Agro-‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
ecology (SOCLA) and the University of Berkeley in California, USA. This was a pioneer program on sustainable agriculture in the Latin-American region, with an interdisciplinary curriculum and four departments of the university contributing to it with scholars from different disciplines. It was a real challenge within the university as it was created against all the strict structures separating disciplines, and firm opposition from some of the scholars within the Agricultural Sciences Department itself. The students were also from different professional backgrounds and some of them received scholarships by SOCLA. SOCLA was born out of the “growing awareness of a group of professionals involved in research, education and extension about the need to design a new agriculture that enhances the environment, preserves local structures and associated biodiversity, promotes food sovereignty and the multiple functions of small farm agriculture” (Altieri, 2008, p. 2)
Research questions
The project objectives aim to answer the following questions
1) Are current agriculture higher-education institutions in ASEAN region preparing professionals responding to the current problems?
2) What are the current changes in agriculture pressuring higher- education institutions to adapt in order to prepare appropriated professionals?
3) How should agricultural education be improved to meet the current and future challenges so as to be responsive to individual and national needs? What are the changes agriculture’s higher education institutes have to make? What type of agricultural education does ASEAN need to meet current and future challenges?
4) How well equipped are present today HAE entities to shape programs for the
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Methodology
This study will have a qualitative approach based on a primary research and literature from different sources from the academia, national policies, and those provided by ASEAN, and other multilateral development institutions. First, institutional resources of international organizations working in the field of higher- education and sustainable agriculture will be analyzed. Information will be driven from academic resources such as articles or books concerning this topic. Secondly, an interview to Prof. Attachai from Chiang Mai University in Thailand will provide information concerning how higher agricultural education (HAE) institutions in the region are adapting to new challenges of the field of agriculture from a conventional agriculture to a sustainable one.
Therefore, the paper is organized as follows: chapter 1 consists of the introduction, justification and objectives. Chapter 2 is a detailed literature review of the transversal topics of the issue, and will have three sections: section one will concern a changing agriculture with an out-of-date higher agricultural education and section two will concern a required adjustment in higher agricultural education.
Finally, Section three will concern a prominent role and linkage with the society:
beyond university. Chapter 3 presents the data and the findings following an interview made to a professional and current Professor of agriculture in Chiang Mai University, relating it to the documental analysis of the Farmer’s School in the region of ASEAN.
Chapter 4 consists of research findings and recommendation on the subject. In chapter 5, the conclusion is presented and the research’s implications and limitations will also be discussed.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Operational definition
It is necessary to clarify some terms that will be relevant to this research. First, Cambridge Dictionary defines “higher education ̈ as: “education at a college or university where subjects are studied at an advanced level ̈. In this study, higher education would be used to distinguish the scope from basic and middle education, as the study’s main interest is in the advanced level of studies. Additionally, higher-education would be related to formal higher-education, which is defined by Sarah E. Eaton in her Wordpress.com website as:
[o]rganized, guided by a formal curriculum, leads to a formally recognized credential such as a high school completion diploma or a degree, and is often guided and recognized by government at some level (Eaton, 2013, p. 1).
Secondly, “agricultural education” is a term possessing a variety of meanings.
According to scholar Craig Anderson (1984), most of the times, agricultural education is synonymous to agricultural extension. This can include programs for training extension workers or, most commonly, field programs directed at small farmers.
However, as many definitions can be given to this concept, the researcher will go through it based on the definition: “it consists of any and all organized programs whose purpose is education or training in agricultural subjects” (Anderson, 1984, p.
34)
Finally, the term of “sustainable agriculture” will be used in this analysis as the opposite of “extension agriculture”. The latter is having the goal of increasing profits without environmental and social concern. “Sustainable agriculture refers to the ability of farms to produce nutritious food without damaging soils, ecosystems or
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
human capital, and that reduces (or eliminates) reliance on external inputs such as chemical fertilizers and pesticides ̈ (Curtis, 2012, p. 2). To UNESCO, sustainable agriculture means to “sustain the economic viability of farm operations, enhance the quality of life for farmers and society as a whole.” (UNESCO, 2010, p. 1)
Research limitations
Firstly, this project has a short time period to meet the researcher’s graduate work schedule. Secondly, this study is focused on ASEAN region, however as mentioned at the beginning, this geographical area is very diverse, and this research will not be able to capture all the constant changes in agriculture higher-education in all the member countries. This is because there are countries at different stages of development and so is agricultural higher- education in each of them. Thirdly, the researcher intended to make a field- trip to gather primary data from The Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture (SEARCA) in the Philippines. Unfortunately, this was not possible, due to the lack of interest of the host organization. Consequently, the researcher had to create an alternative approach within a short-time span, to be able to analyze and prove the assumptions issued from the theory. Therefore, focus on a regional higher-education center, was replaced by a national higher-education institution. In other words, the researcher replaced SEARCA with Chiang Mai University (Thailand) as a case for this research.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Chapter 2-‐ Literature review
The purpose of this paper is to discuss the role of higher agricultural education as one component to face current international needs in this field and also contributing to countries’ development. In ASEAN countries, most of them are located within the so-called “developing” phase. Still, the complexity of agriculture requires an addition of inputs1, all of which are important to support the agricultural development process (Anderson, 1984).
Section 1: A changing agriculture with an out-‐of-‐date higher agricultural education
Agriculture nowadays
The condition of agriculture is closely related with the choices of economic development in our present-day societies. The perceptions of the relative roles of agriculture and industry in economic development were strongly influenced by a number of theoretical and empirical contributions to the economic analysis of development. The existence of "surplus labor" in agriculture was well accepted during
The condition of agriculture is closely related with the choices of economic development in our present-day societies. The perceptions of the relative roles of agriculture and industry in economic development were strongly influenced by a number of theoretical and empirical contributions to the economic analysis of development. The existence of "surplus labor" in agriculture was well accepted during