농업 혁신성장을 위한 농업기술 및 혁신성과 확산체계 개선 방안(1/2차년도)

Abstract

우리 농업의 경쟁력 강화 및 미래성장산업화를 위해 연구개발 투자를 지속적으로 확대하고 실용화·사업화를 강화해왔으나 그 성과가 미흡하다는 평가가 있다. 우리나라 농업 부문의 민간주체들은 자발적인 연구개발 및 기술 확산 여력이 미약하여 국가 및 지자체 기관에 크게 의존하고 있으며, 연구개발 및 기술 지도·보급은 기술개발자· 공급자 중심의 선형모델로서 농업 현장의 수요를 충분히 반영하지 못한다는 것이다.

이러한 점을 극복하기 위하여 기술혁신을 통한 농업경쟁력 강화를 위해서는 기술 수요자인 농업인·농산업기업이 다양한 주체와 상호 협력함으로써 혁신을 이끌어내는 사용자 주도형 또는 네크워크형 농업기술혁신시스템으로의 전환이 요구되고 있으며, 농업혁신시스템의 큰 틀 안에서 농업기술 및 혁신성과 확산체계를 검토·분석하고, 확산체계의 개선 및 역량 강화 방안을 강구할 필요가 있다.

이 연구는 농업기술 및 혁신성과 확산체계의 현황을 제시하고, 농업의 혁신성장을 위한 확산체계 개선 방향과 방안을 제시하고자 한다.

Research Background The government has steadily expanded R & D investment and strengthened commercialization in order to enhance agricultural competitiveness and future growth. Private stakeholders in Korea’s agricultural sector have little room for voluntary R & D and technology diffusion. So they rely heavily on national and local government agencies such as the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, Rural Development Administration, Provincial Agricultural Research and Development Institute, and municipal agricultural technology centers. Dissemination is a linear model for technology developers and suppliers, and does not fully reflect the demands of rural areas. The Center for Agricultural Technology, a traditional technology instruction and dissemination agent, has more difficulty than ever in meeting the growing demands of farmers for technology and information. On the other hand, private institutions lack the incentives and resources for agricultural technology development and innovation. Such supplier-centered R & D and technology guidance and dissemination systems achieved significant results when the central government was able to implement policies quickly, and farmers’ technology level was relatively low. However, as farmers’ demand for technology is diverse, it is not easy to meet such diverse demand. Therefore, in order to strengthen agricultural competitiveness through technological innovation, farmers and agri-industry companies—the technology consumers—should switch to user-driven or network-type agricultural technology innovation systems that induce innovation by cooperating with various stakeholders. Within the framework, it is necessary to review and analyze agricultural technologies, innovations, and diffusion systems, and to seek ways to improve and enhance capacity.

Research Methodology This study used literature research, in-depth interview, FGI, survey, quantitative analysis, collaborative research, manuscript entrustment, and overseas business trip. Theoretical analysis of agricultural technology and innovative performance and diffusion system was conducted through domestic and international literature analysis of innovation diffusion theory. Investigation and analysis of the status of policies, projects and networks of various stakeholders in the diffusion system include public institutions (National Rural Development Administration, Provincial Agricultural Research Service, Agricultural Technology Center), producer organizations (National Agricultural Cooperative Federation, Commodity Agricultural Cooperative), in-depth interviews with farmers, and FGI. In order to analyze the characteristics of agricultural technology supply and demand on the diffusion path selection of farmers and the satisfaction of the diffusion path, 500 farmers (KREI local correspondents) responded to an online survey. Also, we conducted quantitative analysis using the Fractional Multinomial Logit model. Analysis of successful technologies, innovations, and spread cases in areas such as Nonsan Strawberry, Longevity Apple, Goyang Graft Cactus, and Paju Changdan Soybean was conducted through cooperative research with the Agricultural Research Center (Director Jang Min-ki). The survey on the status of the performance diffusion system was conducted through literature surveys, overseas field trips, and Dr. Choi Jeong-nam’s commissioned manuscript.

Findings The directions for institutional improvement based on the current status and analysis of agricultural technology and innovative performance and diffusion system are as follows: First, there should be a transition from a linear diffusion system to a network-type diffusion. Second, there should be a transition to a private-centered innovation and diffusion system. Third, it is necessary to develop a customized route support policy. Specific system improvement tasks based on these system improvement directions are mentioned below. First, in order to cope with the changing agricultural technology and innovation and demand of farmers, and to effectively spread high-quality contents, the agricultural technology and innovation and diffusion system should be converted from the current linear method to the network method centering on regional bases. The characteristics of the networked innovation system centered on regional bases can be suggested in two ways. 1. The transition from One-to-One to Many-to-Many Relationship 2. The transition from national to regional system The relationship between relevant agencies (suppliers) and farmers (consumers) should be shifted from the current one-to-one approach, in which each agency provides farmers with the same content in a networked manner where all stakeholders participate. Also, in the diffusion system formed by loose relations between suppliers and farmers, key stakeholders reflecting regional and item characteristics should be organized as diffusion bases and converted into a compact innovation diffusion network centered on diffusion bases. Second, the Agricultural Technology Center should be able to establish a network of research institutes such as the Rural Development Administration, the Rural Agricultural Research and Development Institute, universities and private diffusion channels, the Agricultural Cooperatives, leading farmers, agricultural consultants, and agricultural enterprises. The role of the coordinator should be expanded to link the demand of farmers to related stakeholders. Unlike the past, as the demand for agricultural technology and innovation performance is diversified, the past linear method—the method by which the Agricultural Technology Center performs mapping and dissemination, reveals many limitations. It must be switched to the network. In other words, it is a coordinator that establishes a network with research institutes such as the Rural Development Administration, Provincial Agricultural Research & Development Institute, universities and private diffusion channels, Nonghyup, leading farmers, farming consultants, and agricultural-related companies. Also, it is a coordinator that connects farmers’ demands and field problems to relevant stakeholders. The function should be expanded. In this regard, it is necessary to benchmark the agricultural innovation support system in Japan. Third, leading farmers are both consumers and suppliers of information and technology within the agricultural technology and innovation and diffusion system. Although the share of leading farmers is decreasing as compared to the past, it is considered as a route that many farmers, who lack cultivation capacity and network, rely on and think highly of. It is necessary to strengthen the policies to raise the technological capabilities of leading farmers such as agricultural masters, new knowledge farmers, WPL, and farming mentors, and to spread the technology of leading farmers to neighboring farmers. In addition, there is a need for a policy that supports the development of leading consultants with high technological capabilities through the participation of various innovation activities as farming consultants. Lastly, it is necessary to promote agriculture, forestry and food technology, and innovation by utilizing the accumulated experiences of retired scientists. Fourth, the NACF needs to strengthen and spread agricultural technology and innovation by deepening the linkage between farmers and various businesses including technical guidance and sales, finding farmers with high growth potential as leading farmers, and responding to their requests. To this end, the NACF needs to benchmark Japan’ TAC. TAC serves as a bridge between the Japan Agricultural Coorporatives and farmers, providing guidance for purchasing, agricultural machinery, sales, life, credit, deductions and management. Also, it actively identifies and responds to farmers’ demands. Fifth, it is necessary to establish agricultural technology, innovation and spread systems for farmers. Depending on the various characteristics of farmers, their preferred agricultural technologies, innovations and spreading paths are different. However, the current technical guidance and dissemination system has a flat delivery system that does not take into account the characteristics of these farmers. In this study, farmers are classified into ① farmers migrated from urban areas, ② general farmers, ③ independent farmers, and ④ leading farmers based on innovation capacity and related education frequency and network level. Intermediate farmers, who have the potential to become leading farmers are also a component of this five-group categorization. Sixth, in order to expand the supply and demand for technical information through the Internet and SNS, public institutions need to play a role as facilitators rather than directly participate and supply information. It is necessary to identify and implement various support programs such as contests and awards to encourage the production of contents of leading or excellent farmers, and provide appropriate incentives to encourage the participation of experts and leading farmers to activate SNS for each item. Finally, agricultural technology and innovation and diffusion systems must change along with agriculture and also in line with the changes in society. Social demands for agriculture have gradually changed from production increase to various functions. Besides, the demand for change of innovation diffusion system to cope with such changes is growing. In order to respond to a social consensus on the provision of a public innovation diffusion system and to respond to changes in farmers’ demands, our innovation diffusion system should be gradually transformed from the public to private-oriented innovation diffusion systems as in Japan and the Netherlands.

Researchers: Park Jiyun, Lee Myonggi, Cho Wonju, Kim Buyoung Research period: 2019. 1. ~ 2019. 12. E-mail address: jiyunpark@krei.re.kr