it is mainly user motivations to seek innovations that drive a decentralized diffusion process, and this may be more cost efficient than situations in which professional change agents manage the diffusion process. User self-reliance is publicly popular; users generally like such systems.
Several disadvantages, however, usually characterize decentralized diffusion systems (in comparison with centralized diffusion systems)
1.Technical expertise is sometimes difficult to bring to bear on decisions about which innovations to diffuse and to adopt, and it is possible for ‘bad innovations; to diffuse through a decentralized system because of this lack of ‘quality control’. So when a diffusion system is disseminating innovations that involve a high level of technical expertise, a decentralized diffusion system may be less appropriate than a more centralized diffusion system.
2.Futhermore, extremely decentralized diffusion systems lack a coordinating role (that is, the ‘big picture’ of the system, where problems exist and which innovations might be used to solve them). For example, a local user may not know which other users he or she could go to site-visit an innovation. Completely decentralized diffusion system thus may suffer from the fact that local users, who control the system, lack certain aspects of the big picture about users’ problems and about available innovations.
3.Sometimes a national government wants an innovation diffused for which the people do not feel a need. In a highly decentralized system, such an innovation simply will not diffuse. An example is family planning in developing nations, which a government may regard as a high priority but which local people may not want. There are very few decentralized diffusion systems for contraception in Latin America, Africa, and Asia
our present discussion suggests that:
1.Decentralized diffusion systems are most appropriate for certain conditions, such as for diffusing innovations that do not involve a high level of technical expertise, among a set of users with relatively heterogeneous conditions. When these conditions are homogeneous, a relatively more centralized diffusion system may be most appropriate.
2.Certain elements of centralized and decentralized diffusion systems can be combined to form a diffusion system that uniquely fits a particular situation. For example, a diffusion system may combined a central-type coordinating role, with decentralized decisions being made about which innovations should be diffused and which users others should site-visit. Technical evaluations of promising innovations can be made in an otherwise decentralized diffusion system.
We now briefly describe: 1 a relatively centralized diffusion system, the agricultural extension services, 2 three relatively decentralized diffusion systems (Legitech, the Tachai agricultural model of China, and the Davis energy conservation program), and 3 a hybrid system that combines certain elements of both centralized and decentralized diffusions, the National Diffusion network.
it is mainly user motivations to seek innovations that drive a decentralized diffusion process, and this may be more cost efficient than situations in which professional change agents manage the diffusion process. User self-reliance is publicly popular; users generally like such systems.
Several disadvantages, however, usually characterize decentralized diffusion systems (in comparison with centralized diffusion systems)
1.Technical expertise is sometimes difficult to bring to bear on decisions about which innovations to diffuse and to adopt, and it is possible for ‘bad innovations; to diffuse through a decentralized system because of this lack of ‘quality control’. So when a diffusion system is disseminating innovations that involve a high level of technical expertise, a decentralized diffusion system may be less appropriate than a more centralized diffusion system.
2.Futhermore, extremely decentralized diffusion systems lack a coordinating role (that is, the ‘big picture’ of the system, where problems exist and which innovations might be used to solve them). For example, a local user may not know which other users he or she could go to site-visit an innovation. Completely decentralized diffusion system thus may suffer from the fact that local users, who control the system, lack certain aspects of the big picture about users’ problems and about available innovations.
3.Sometimes a national government wants an innovation diffused for which the people do not feel a need. In a highly decentralized system, such an innovation simply will not diffuse. An example is family planning in developing nations, which a government may regard as a high priority but which local people may not want. There are very few decentralized diffusion systems for contraception in Latin America, Africa, and Asia
our present discussion suggests that:
1.Decentralized diffusion systems are most appropriate for certain conditions, such as for diffusing innovations that do not involve a high level of technical expertise, among a set of users with relatively heterogeneous conditions. When these conditions are homogeneous, a relatively more centralized diffusion system may be most appropriate.
2.Certain elements of centralized and decentralized diffusion systems can be combined to form a diffusion system that uniquely fits a particular situation. For example, a diffusion system may combined a central-type coordinating role, with decentralized decisions being made about which innovations should be diffused and which users others should site-visit. Technical evaluations of promising innovations can be made in an otherwise decentralized diffusion system.
We now briefly describe: 1 a relatively centralized diffusion system, the agricultural extension services, 2 three relatively decentralized diffusion systems (Legitech, the Tachai agricultural model of China, and the Davis energy conservation program), and 3 a hybrid system that combines certain elements of both centralized and decentralized diffusions, the National Diffusion network.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..