Institutional development, the world bank, and India's new agricultural extension programme
分析了世界银行资助的印度农业推广培训与访问系统为何未能改善推广质量，原因在于忽视原有系统缺陷、系统本身缺陷及引入方式问题，并揭示了背后的利益与政治因素。
Abstract The new World Bank‐sponsored and funded Training and Visit system of agricultural extension represents a major attempt by the Bank to promote institutional development. The very considerable investment has in fact resulted in little change or improvement in the quality of extension. The reasons lie in failure to analyse the cause of the weakness of the previous extension systems, inherent defects of the Training and Visit system, and the way in which it has been introduced into India. These failures in turn can be explained by the interests and the politics underlying the programme. Notes The author is a Fellow of the Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex. Most of the material on which this article is based was obtained while the author was attached to the National Institute for Rural Development, Hyderabad, India, and involved in the National Workshop on the Transfer of Farm Technology under the Training and Visit System, 1–8 February 1983. The participants in the workshop comprised mainly senior staff of the Departments of Agriculture of the states of India and extension specialists from the Agricultural Universities. While some of the material for this paper was obtained from the papers submitted to the workshop, at least as much was garnered from workshop discussions, field visits and information from other people involved with the introduction of the new Training and Visit agricultural extension system in India. While acknowledging a heavy debt to the organisers and participants of the workshop, it is important to exonerate them from any responsibility for the contents of this paper. Many would disagree with some of the conclusions and, even more, would dissociate themselves from the critical tone. For reasons which are evident from reading the paper, it is politic not to name individuals, inside and outside the workshop, who provided information on the politics discussed here. The author is grateful to Simon Maxwell for discussion of some of the issues, and to John Howell for comments on an earlier draft.