From: dc_ags@ac.nsac.ns.ca (Don Christie)
Subject: Re: malthus
Reply-To: dc_ags@ac.nsac.ns.ca
Organization: Nova Scotia Agricultural College, Nova Scotia, CANADA
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 16:37:26 GMT

> >  
> > >..and I have seen a decrease in
> > > positive visions, positive solutions and an increase in
> > > criticizing which is lately turning into smear at all levels.
> > > Except in academic circles, and there the biggest problem
> > > is perhaps over specialization:  to study biology one ends
> > > up specializing in how many different sub specialties....
> > > biotech, molecular, micro, etc.
> >  
> > This is the natural result of an evolving science. As our knowledge in any
> > given area increases, students are faced with an increasing amount of
> > subject matter. At the undergraduate level, however, the courses tend to
> > concentrate on the meat of the subject. Agriculture is a multi-faceted 
> > discipline. Students of agriculture must be familiar with a broad range
> > of topics, including biology. For example, chemistry, mathematics, plant
> > and animal physiology, weed science, mycology, entomology, microbiology,
> > economics, engineering, ag. mechanization and soil science were all topics
> > I was required to study. I am not sure how one would be able to decrease 
> > the science without seriously impairing the overall effect of the program.
> > Perhaps you can make some suggestions
>
>A question arises here concerning the matter of funding priorities. I
>do appreciate the nature of the academic phenomenon referred to as the
>"knowledge explosion", but one could argue that this has come about
>through a relatively unlimited allocation of resources to answering
>every conceivable question which ever arose in the mind of every
>scholar, rather than as a "natural result of an evolving science".
>
>One might ask also whether such questions arise from the asking of
>other questions in cloistered academic debate, or whether they arise
>from the analysis of empirical data. The opportunity for the former
>to arise is ever-present; whether they are relevant to anything, or
>whether their pursuit is rather indicative of a lack of intellectual
>discipline, are quite other matters.
>
>Perhaps knowing what is relevant, what is useful and important, as
>informed by the ongoing consultation with real people facing real
>problems out there in the real world for which a fresh, innovative
>and wholly inquisitive US academe was once renowned and respected,
>would alter the situation somewhat.

Gil,

I see your point, and it is well taken. It is beyond question that academics
(particularly in N.A.) tend to choose topics to study that in many cases
appear to be of no value, or which ar only of interest to other academics.

I don't pretend to be any expert on the subject, but I am familiar with the
way that the Department of Agriculture here makes its decision on what (if
any) knowledge or technology will find its way into the food production
process. 

What we have here is basically a two-faceted institution: one part is devoted
entirely to teaching students agricultural science. This would include graduate
students as well as undergraduates, and it includes professional researchers 
who also serve as instructors. The other part of the department is comprised
of professionals who serve the farming industry directly. There are personnel
whose job is to provide farmers with advice and information as they require it.

In other words, the segment of our organization which deals with farmers 
directly is being driven by the requests/needs/desires of farmers themselves,
not the academics. This group of professionals does occasionally draw on 
knowledge from academics, but the one thing they do NOT do is jump to 
immediately implement whatever hair-brained scheme some student has come up 
with... information coming from this group is very carefully considered,
and if a given specialist has a problem that he/she is not sure about, I am
here to assure you that our professionals collaborate with each other in order
that they deliver the best solution that they can.

With regard to the allocation of resources: funding for various projects
that are performed comes either from private industry or from any of several
granting agencies. Funding for the extension area of the department comes
exclusively from government. Some of that funding is allocated to performing
evaluation trials so that new varieties/methods/whatever can be tested in
practise (i.e. by real people with real concerns and in a real situation).
In this way, the more valuable varieties/methods can be identified, evaluated,
and in some cases, recommended to farmers. 


//Don
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who ELSE could have written The Adventures of Wild Bill Groady??