{"title":"安大略省土壤咨询服务的转变","authors":"E. Martin","doi":"10.21083/RURALREVIEW.V5I1.6590","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The past several decades has witnessed a marked transformation of Ontario’s agricultural extension services from being a provincial government run service to one that’s is marked by a diverse network of public and private information service providers. This presentation reports a preliminary analysis of the contemporarysoil advisory services, especially looking at how different actors are organised, methods used and emerging challenges. The data were collected using key informant interviews with a purposively selectedadvisor. The findings highlight a variety of service providers at play within the soil advisory services which comprised of numerous commodity marketing boards, producer organisations, input and equipmentsuppliers, OMAFRA and the University of Guelph. These actors are organised through various formal andinformal networks, although respondents expressed their concerns on coordination and communication within the network, with an attendant negative impact on network efficiency in advisory service provision. Although most respondents yearn for an individual approach, mainly represented by the public sector, the current service delivery is dominated by groups and mass methods. The findings also indicate a move fromadvisory roles as generalist knowledge brokers to specialist knowledge brokers. The advisory service isgoverned by a ‘hands off’ approach because of withdrawal of public service support that creates significant gaps for coordination and collaboration among different players. The gaps need to be filled in—eitherchampioned by public or private sector actors—but it is not possible without significant changes in existingpolicy and public supports.","PeriodicalId":247701,"journal":{"name":"Rural Review: Ontario Rural Planning, Development, and Policy","volume":"241 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Transformation of Soil Advisory Services in Ontario\",\"authors\":\"E. Martin\",\"doi\":\"10.21083/RURALREVIEW.V5I1.6590\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The past several decades has witnessed a marked transformation of Ontario’s agricultural extension services from being a provincial government run service to one that’s is marked by a diverse network of public and private information service providers. This presentation reports a preliminary analysis of the contemporarysoil advisory services, especially looking at how different actors are organised, methods used and emerging challenges. The data were collected using key informant interviews with a purposively selectedadvisor. The findings highlight a variety of service providers at play within the soil advisory services which comprised of numerous commodity marketing boards, producer organisations, input and equipmentsuppliers, OMAFRA and the University of Guelph. These actors are organised through various formal andinformal networks, although respondents expressed their concerns on coordination and communication within the network, with an attendant negative impact on network efficiency in advisory service provision. Although most respondents yearn for an individual approach, mainly represented by the public sector, the current service delivery is dominated by groups and mass methods. The findings also indicate a move fromadvisory roles as generalist knowledge brokers to specialist knowledge brokers. The advisory service isgoverned by a ‘hands off’ approach because of withdrawal of public service support that creates significant gaps for coordination and collaboration among different players. The gaps need to be filled in—eitherchampioned by public or private sector actors—but it is not possible without significant changes in existingpolicy and public supports.\",\"PeriodicalId\":247701,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rural Review: Ontario Rural Planning, Development, and Policy\",\"volume\":\"241 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rural Review: Ontario Rural Planning, Development, and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21083/RURALREVIEW.V5I1.6590\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rural Review: Ontario Rural Planning, Development, and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21083/RURALREVIEW.V5I1.6590","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The Transformation of Soil Advisory Services in Ontario
The past several decades has witnessed a marked transformation of Ontario’s agricultural extension services from being a provincial government run service to one that’s is marked by a diverse network of public and private information service providers. This presentation reports a preliminary analysis of the contemporarysoil advisory services, especially looking at how different actors are organised, methods used and emerging challenges. The data were collected using key informant interviews with a purposively selectedadvisor. The findings highlight a variety of service providers at play within the soil advisory services which comprised of numerous commodity marketing boards, producer organisations, input and equipmentsuppliers, OMAFRA and the University of Guelph. These actors are organised through various formal andinformal networks, although respondents expressed their concerns on coordination and communication within the network, with an attendant negative impact on network efficiency in advisory service provision. Although most respondents yearn for an individual approach, mainly represented by the public sector, the current service delivery is dominated by groups and mass methods. The findings also indicate a move fromadvisory roles as generalist knowledge brokers to specialist knowledge brokers. The advisory service isgoverned by a ‘hands off’ approach because of withdrawal of public service support that creates significant gaps for coordination and collaboration among different players. The gaps need to be filled in—eitherchampioned by public or private sector actors—but it is not possible without significant changes in existingpolicy and public supports.