نویسندگان
1 کارشناس ارشد رشته ترویج و آموزش کشاورزی، دانشگاه رازی کرمانشاه
2 دانشیار گروه ترویج و توسعه کشاورزی و عضو مرکز پژوهشی تحقیقات توسعه اقتصادی-اجتماعی، دانشگاه رازی کرمانشاه
3 کارشناس ارشد رشته ترویج و آموزش کشاورزی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس
4 استادیار گروه ترویج و توسعه کشاورزی و عضو مرکز پژوهشی تحقیقات توسعه اقتصادی-اجتماعی، دانشگاه رازی کرمانشاه
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Introduction
The purpose of this descriptive survey design is evaluating the performance of Agricultural Engineering Technical and Advisory Service Firms (AETASF) in Kermanshah and Zanjan Provinces. Advisory Service Firms have been established since 1386 as pilots in these provinces for providing employment in agricultural graduates, developing outreach programs among farmers, degreasing government costs and responsibility, and contrasting economic crisis. Liberalization and privatization started from Western Europe in the late 1960s, North America in the 1970s, South America and Africa over the 1980s.
In Iran privatization was proposed about transfer economic business in the "1st. economic, social and cultural program", but this policy was done in the 3rd. development plan. In agricultural sector, privatization was anticipated in extension of agriculture extension and education sub-sector by the Supreme administrative council in 1992. The plan of Privatization in extension of agriculture and education sub-sector passed by council in 1990 but in fact has been started by wheat supervisor engineering plan and followed by farm councils plan to provide employment for agricultural graduates under monitoring of the engineering organization of agricultural and natural resources from 2001. The main purpose of farm councils plan has been preparing suitable conditions for legal, freedom and verifies graduates activities in agricultural fields. Therefore the Agricultural Engineering Technical and Advisory Service Firms (AETASF) started its activities in Kermanshah and Zanjan Provinces as a pilot in 2002 and after that across the country in 2008.
Methodology
In this study because of logorrheas of the performance of AETASF that has been different, and lack of comprehensive information about these firms activities, comprehensive evaluation of them have been done by integrative methods (quantitative - qualitative) and selected indicators in the mentioned provinces. The first step was reviewing the situation of labor, equipment and infrastructure, investment and financial in the Agricultural Engineering Technical and Advisory Service Firms in the provinces. Then their performance in the field of education and extension advisory, filed – technical, governmental contracts and private ones, sales of agricultural inputs as well as Job satisfaction have been evaluated and compared. Finally the proposals for improvement have been suggested.
The population of this study included the supervisors of AETASF in Kermanshah and Zanjan (166). A census of all supervisors participated in the study. Performance indicators were measured using Agricultural Jihad Organization specialists, members of ANREO, Supervisors in AETASF, library search, and university faculty members. A total of 33 indicators were derived. Reliability was measured using a panel of experts. This study is a practical one, and its results can be used in program planning by policy-makers.
The population of this study included the supervisors of AETASF in Kermanshah and Zanjan (166). A census of all supervisors participated in the study. Performance indicators were measured using Agricultural Jihad Organization specialists, members of ANREO, Supervisors in AETASF, library search, and university faculty members. A total of 33 indicators were derived. Reliability was measured using a panel of experts. This study is a practical one, and its results can be used in program planning by policy-makers.
Results
Based on the results, AETASF in Kermanshah has been better in aspect of labor situation (number of members, the rate of agricultural extension agent with agriculture, members education) than those of Zanjan province. But in the aspect of equipment and infrastructure (building, car, land, etc.) the firms of Zanjan have been better. Also in Economic a Investment situation (capital, received, loans, etc.), Zanjan is more desirable; and AETASF in Zanjan province have significantly been more active in terms of private contracting with farmers and government officials as well as private companies. Also the AETASF in Zanjan have more sailed in aspect of agricultural inputs, too.
Based on the results, AETASF in Kermanshah has been better in aspect of labor situation (number of members, the rate of agricultural extension agent with agriculture, members education) than those of Zanjan province. But in the aspect of equipment and infrastructure (building, car, land, etc.) the firms of Zanjan have been better. Also in Economic a Investment situation (capital, received, loans, etc.), Zanjan is more desirable; and AETASF in Zanjan province have significantly been more active in terms of private contracting with farmers and government officials as well as private companies. Also the AETASF in Zanjan have more sailed in aspect of agricultural inputs, too.
Conclusion
Job satisfaction among supervisors in Zanjan province is higher than those of Kermanshah. It is therefore recommended that AETASF‘s in Kermanshah province be provided with more freedom to engage in private contracts and their government based duties gradually diminish. Finally, AETASF’s in Zanjan should expand their specialists to farmers ratio so that they can play more active roles in training.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)