In recent years there has been a growing literature that advocates various forms of participatory development. This is illustrated by the promotion of approaches/tools such as participatory rural appraisal (PRA), participatory technology development (PTD), and participatory process projects 1 These "new" approaches are fast taking on the form of a new generalised orthodoxy for solving development problems. It would seem from the perspective of some of the promoters of this orthodoxy that the problem of development is no longer one of not having the right approaches and methods, but one of getting recalcitrant policy makers, bureaucrats, academics to appreciate and adopt these new methods and techniques. My concerns with this new advocacy are that: i It does not relate to experience; ii It does not address issues of power structure and control over information and other resources in multiple and complex arenas of science and technology (S&T); iii By placing major emphasis on management approaches and tools, the new orthodoxy is cutting itself off from a critical reflective understanding of the deeper determinants of technical and social change. Unfortunately, I suspect that if this new orthodoxy does not develop a more critical reflective view of itself then, like previous dominant orthodoxies, it will soon have to develop a range of "escape hatches" to explain why these participatory approaches are not giving the results that their advocates promise. / AVOCADO series; v 06/95

The purpose of this study was to determine the linkages that exist among research, extension, education, and farmers (R-E-E-F) and to propose ways of strengthening these linkages. To achieve this goal the following specific objectives provided the basis of this research: 1. To describe the context in which the R-E-E-F linkage exists. 2. To examine the ways that R-E-E-F functions including: - formal and informal linkages, - communication strategies, - feedback mechanisms, and - diffusion of technical information. 3. To determine how administrators view the research, technology-transfer, and farmer linkage. The study was based on Kaimowitz et aI's. (1990) conceptual framework for studying the links between agricultural research and technology transfer in developing countries. This framework looked at "linkage mechanisms" in terms of the organizational procedures used to maintain research-technology transfer links and "contextual factors" i.e., all the factors that affect the use and relevance of linkage mechanisms. / Ph. D.

台灣農業科技之技術及研發能量在國際上頗負盛名，同時也是目前行政院推動六大新興產業-精緻農業中相當重要的一環，然而應該如何將此具有優勢之農業科技實際落實並轉換成經濟價值就變成是一個相當重要的議題。 台灣在七○年代開始由政府推動整廠輸出之貿易方式，不論是在政策上給予特定協助或是組成專門機構輔導從事從廠輸出之業者，因此，在政府的支持及業者的努力之下，確實為台灣創造了許多的經濟發展成果，並且一直持續到現在，顯見整廠輸出的確是一種可行的交易方式，因此在本論文中將從農業科技的本質、特性以及整體環境等面向來討論農業科技是否是適合採用整廠輸出模式做為交易的方式。 整廠輸出的交易由標的選擇、業務爭取、設計建廠、測試訓練、移交營運等五個連續的階段所構成，每一個階段都包含不同的工作項目、不同的交易標的。整廠輸出是一種交易項目複雜、交易時間長、風險高、帶有強烈整合性質、但相對地能創造更高附加價值的交易方式，而採用這類方式的技術多是較高階或是較為複雜的技術組合，因此做為輸出的一方，需要擁有相當的資源與整合能力才能夠順利完成整個交易。 就農業科技本身而言，多數人對於交易的標的都仍停留在「產品」的階段，而忽略實際上在農業科技應用的過程中所形成或產生之技術、know how、原料、設備資材、半成品等也能夠做為交易的標的，但是因為農業的本質上有其特殊性，因此也會連帶影響到農業科技商品化的選擇，如商品的選擇及組合多元、技術實施可能受限、知識經驗含量深，容易因人而異、保護複雜性高及需考量繁殖特性、悠關生活，安全性要求高、回收期較長等都是在將農業科技商品化過程中需要考量的重要議題。 從整廠輸出執行中呈現出四大特色：複合性交易、經驗之必要、環境之創造與異業之結合來看，整廠輸出的模式實際上可以視為是創造或是維持一個該項技術適合實施與應用的環境，而這樣的特色對於農業科技因其本質在商品化過程中所形成之需求剛好互相呼應，能夠借此更加確保農業科技在應用過程中的成效與價值。因此對於農業科技來說，整廠輸出確實是一種可以做為商品化交易的一種選擇。但是在農業科技進行整廠輸出之前，輸出方也需要就輸入地區對於該技術之接受程度、輸入地區對於該技術之發展限制、保護方式、以及與輸入地區之政策競合等問題進一步了解，以確保該項技術市場之存在，而技術於輸入之後的確有足夠的資源來支持，並能夠獲得適當的保護以避免技術輸出方反而因此失去競爭力，同時也能更了解該輸入區對技術的需求目的以及可能的行銷或合作對象。 除此之外，在本論文中針對目前環境對於農業科技採用整廠輸出模式可能會遭遇到的問題進行討論。由於農業在台灣發展歷史悠久，但絕大多數是透過「產品」交易的方式進行，因此業者對於技術交易的知識與經驗不夠充分，所以在商品化的過程中可能會碰到許多困難無法解決；再者，農業以往多半被視為傳統產業，因此外界的資源、資金、人力等資源也較難主動投入到農業領域，同時再加上業者目前發展的規模都較小，面對整廠輸出這樣複雜而長期的交易過程是否有足夠的能力、資源、彈性去面對也是一項需要克服的問題。 整體而言，台灣所擁有的農業科技技術含含量及know how均有相當高的水準，有能力擔任技術輸出方，而面對食品安全、糧荒議題備受重視、新興市場興起及對技術的需求急切，因此對於農業科技整廠輸出這樣的需求是存在且相當必要的，是以對台灣來說整廠輸出的確是一種可行的交易選擇。 然而，在目前的整體環境之下，若要採用整廠輸出的交易模式仍有一定之挑戰，因此於本論文最後分別對業者及政府提出建議。對業者來說，最重要的是要了解技術與產業之發展，挑選適當的技術做為整廠輸出之核心，並對此技術嚴加保護及掌握，如此才能長久保持競爭力，同時業者也應該更加強對商業化活動的了解與多元人才的引進，強化企業的經營與規模；而對政府而言，最重要的則是建構一個有利於整廠輸出模式執行的環境，包括整廠輸出模式之宣導及推廣，提供業者在執行過程中的實質協助，並協助將分散於學研單及民間業者或個人的技術整合，組成技術組合，同時也應就行政管理層面整合，減少業者在執行整廠輸出過程中因為行政程序或是不同單位之規定而造成時間或資源上的浪費，且應積極透過政策來導農業加速產業化，改變一般人對於農業的觀感，吸納更多的能量與人才進入農業，促進成正向的循環。 / Agriculture technology developments and the research abilities in Taiwan are well known around the world. Nowadays in Taiwan agriculture technology development is one of the most important strategies, so that how to transform the technology into real economic value is becoming a big issue. In this research, we will discuss whether the turnkey project is suitable for agriculture technology or not from several points of view, such as the nature of agriculture technology, the characteristics in its commercialization progress, the outside environments, ect. In 1980’s, governments in Taiwan began to promote the’’ Turnkey Project ’’ model to the industries and gave them assistances in both policy making and consulting institute establishing. These strategies really contributed to the economic development in the following years. So the turnkey project could be a workable and useful business model. The turnkey project business model consists of five phases, including target setting, project bidding, design and construction, testing and training, and transferring the management. Each stage has different tasks and different issues awaited to be accomplished. It’s a complicated, high-risk, and long-term deal. Usually, we will use the turnkey project when having a high-level technology or complicated technology portfolios in one trade. Thus as being the technology supplier, highly integrative ability and lots of resources are requested. When talking about trade in agriculture, it comes out ’’products ’’ in most people’s minds. Actually, there are more than products which could be viewed as the trading subjects, such as the supporting technologies, know how, raw materials, equipments, etc. Therefore, agriculture has many distinctive characteristics when commercializing, and these characteristics will lead to different results. All these characteristics are important issues to deal with. The turnkey Project is a kind of environment creating and preserving. It creates the appropriate environment for the technology to practice. When this model used on agriculture technology, it is just compliance with the distinctive characteristics of agriculture technology. Therefore, turnkey project model could ensure the better results and higher value of agriculture technology. Before choosing turnkey project as the business model, the technology owner or supplier needs to confirm several conditions about the target importing country or area. He has to check whether the acceptance of the technology is high, the developing restriction of the technology is few, the protection of the technology is easy, and the local government policies is supportive, to make sure this agriculture technology can enter, exit here and not to reduce his own competitiveness at the same time. Viewing the world as a market, the demand of agriculture technology is urgent and serious because the food safety and the food shortage issues are becoming more and more critical and the emerging countries are eager to have new and good technologies in developing their own countries. Taiwan’s agriculture technologies are both good at quality and quantity. Therefore, being the technology exporter with the turnkey project model is a great opportunity to Taiwan. However, there are still some challenges now in Taiwan when using turnkey project as the business model. To solve the problems, as the private firms, they have to figure out the development of the industry and the technology, and then find out the core of technologies, set up an appropriate protection and design a proper trading package. Also they need to learn more about business language and logics for better communication with their customers in the future. For the government sections, their missions are to create a friendly environment for the business executing turnkey project.