Utilizing virtual communities of practice in the national campaign of wheat in Egypt: action research

Abstract

Background

Virtual Community of Practices (VCoP) simply is a method to use social media in extension, yet its roots depend on a combination of four concepts: community of practice, social media, social learning theory, and pluralistic extension. The technical action research design was followed to put the VCoP into action and explore its profile. This study aimed to introduce a community of practice using social network applications to policy makers in the agricultural sector.

Methodology

Action research was conducted to validate the use of a VCoP in the National Campaign of Wheat in Egypt. A baseline survey, a content analysis of VCoP conversations, and an assessment study were used to collect the data. The frequency, range, percentage, mean, and average score were used for statistical analysis.

Results

The VCoP reached 22.22% and 10.40% of the wheat farmers in the two target villages, respectively. A high degree of knowledge exchange was detected among members, while messages crossed the VCoP borders as friends were invited to join the group. The VCoP helped its members establish new relationships with other stakeholders, and they expressed their need to expand membership to include other stakeholders. The media used in the VCoP was satisfactory; however, the need for more video messages and internet links was expressed. Extension agents believe that the VCoP complements other extension methods. Farmers see greater potential for cooperation than conflict, while bias is minimal among research, extension, traders, and company agents.

Conclusions

Farmers and other service providers in a village can be aggregated in a VCoP. This approach has proven to be valid as an extension community method for generating and sharing information with high “reach”. Coordination and training are essential for running and managing groups. Yearly programs, rather than seasonal programs, are more suitable for sustainability.

1 Background

In Egypt, imports were used to compensate for the gap between wheat production and consumption. This “wheat food gap increased from approximately 5.2 to approximately 12.9 million tons over the period 2005–2020” [1]. The situation became critical after the Ukrainian War, which put wheat imports at risk and called for bridging the gap depending on local production.

The national campaign for wheat is still one of the main annual events of the Egyptian Agricultural Strategy 2030 [2]. The campaign program depends mainly on demonstration fields (DFs). In 2022, the campaign implemented 3018 DF, one of which was Feddan (local area measure, 1 Feddan = 4200 square meters), which was distributed all over the country's villages [3].

The technical intervention of the campaign usually includes new varieties and a package of Good Agricultural Practices (GAP), including innovative management practices and technologies. Extension intervention depends on DFs, which are often supported by limited farmer meetings, field days, harvest days, field visits, and bulletins in addition to public media efforts [3]. These DFs are a type of “proof-of-concept demonstration that applies an alternative management practice on a field or group of fields; it is discussed during field days to provide an understanding of how it was done and the outcome” [4].

For many years, the national campaign detected a significant gap between DFs that apply GAP under the close supervision of a specialized research team and DFs that apply to both neighboring and terminal fields. The production of non-DFs was reported to be behind that of DFs by 20.16% in 2022 [5].

Many factors can explain the difference in production between DFs and other fields, such as differences in timing, spraying, fertilization, and herbicide application, which are difficult to control. However, extending the evaluation of the impact of DF knowledge raises other behavior-related issues. From an extension point of view, many studies have noted that there is a significant gap in farmer knowledge and application between DFs, neighboring fields where farmers are exposed to the GAP implemented in the DF, and terminal fields where farmers are not exposed to the GAP to be used as a control group [6], although their farmers are all members of the same community of practice (CoP) in the village. “A Community of Practice is a group of people who share an interest or passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly” [13]; i.e., knowledge is assumed to be shared and generated [7,8,9,10,11,12]. These results seem to show a weak point in providing knowledge for all farmers by relying on the DF method.

In fact, the mechanism through which to locate and mobilize the target audience in almost all extension programs and projects is missing. A shortage of extension personnel and a limited budget deepen this problem. One of the solutions is to follow the pluralistic extension approach, which is based on working in a multiple-service provider environment with varied sourcing, interests, and knowledge. Knowledge generation and sharing occur better in a mixed community of agricultural value chain parties [14, 15]. This concept is emphasized by the CoP supported by eXtension [16].

The main value of the CoP for extension comes from facilitating social learning processes through information sharing, advice, imitating experiences, and generating new knowledge [17]. The commonly used communication channels in traditional CoPs in villages might be influential variables influencing the variance in knowledge gained, attitudes, and application intentions.

A major conclusion can be drawn from these results: reaching grassroots farmers in CoPs can help fill the knowledge gap and hence the production gap. An unforeseen chance appeared lately with the emergence of the internet and mobile applications. Many CoPs take advantage of free social network applications. As professionals, farmers can also support their CoPs with these new virtual channels. Shaping a Virtual Community of Practice (VCoP) for farmers would need to locate active farmers of the same professional interest, a purpose that would be exchanging knowledge and services, some agreed-upon rules, and a digital application that can fulfill interaction requirements [18]. Managing such extension-oriented VCoPs requires more than a leader/champion or an active group, as Wenger suggested [19]. Sobrero [20], Kranendonk and Kersten identified three distinct masters needed—one for the process, one for innovation, and one for learning and development. VCoP can be seen as a community of practices that depends on social learning among multiple stakeholders in a social media application platform.

The use of VCoPs to reach the target audience is still in the gray area in Egypt. This raises the following research questions that this study seeks to answer:

• 1. What are the information sharing features of the VCoP?

• 2. What are the features of VCoP communication as an extension method?

• 3. What are the effects of VCoP as an extension intervention?

2 The study objectives

This study aimed to introduce a community of practice using social network applications to agricultural sector policy makers. The general objective is to conduct action research to validate the use of a virtual community of practice in the National Campaign of Wheat in Egypt.

The detailed objectives are as follows:

The detailed objectives are as follows:

• 1. To explore the information-sharing features of the VCoP regarding the development of participants’ numbers in VCoPs’, messages exchanged by participants’ categories, Types of messages, and the technical messages’ objective.

• 2. To identify the VCoP communication features as an extension method indicated by the media used.

• 3. To explore the effects of VCoP as an extension intervention on each of the productivity, information usefulness, respondents’ satisfaction with the media used in the VCoP, reach of VCoP compared to that of other extension methods, social relations in the VCoP, cross-border information sharing, the potentials of VCoP scale-out, potentials of VCoP to support administrative work, and evidence of multiservice providers’ adaptation to VCoP rules.

3 Methodology

The study followed the technical action research methodology which focuses on technical goals to emphasize the outcomes of a practice or an intervention and can be used by external researchers while still having collaborative aspects [21].

The study was conducted in three stages using 3 complementary research methods. Firstly, the planning and coordination stage was supported by a baseline survey conducted in December 2022 to identify the features of the existing communication network of the community of practice. Three questionnaires were developed to interview a random sample of 29 and 25 farmers from “Meet Habib” and “Meet Hamal” respectively, in addition to two questionnaires for extension agents and company agents/input traders. The questionnaire included personal data and questions about the extension activities they dealt with in the village. The second stage was the acting stage that depended on documenting and analyzing exchanged information using content analysis method. Participants’ posts in the VCoPs of both villages were coded and tabulated in the data sheets daily throughout the study period. Finally, the reflecting phase that included a final assessment study through a phone interview using a questionnaire for farmers. Personal interviews with both extension agents and company agents/input traders were performed using two questionnaires. In addition to personal data, the questionnaires aimed to identify respondents’ opinions about different aspects of the intervention.

3.1 Location

This research was conducted in the “Meet Habib” and “Meet Hamal” villages in the Sharkia governorate, Lower Egypt, within the national campaign of wheat 2022–2023.

3.2 Time span

The research started on December 2022 to July 2023 covering the whole wheat season from planting to harvest and continued to the rice season to identify the potential sustainability of the intervention.

3.3 Sampling

Meet Habib (VCoP 1) and Meet Hamaal (VCoP 2) villages were selected from the 509 villages of the Al-Sharkia governorate [22] based on their wheat production, location and active extension agent. The formation of one VCoP in each village was targeted with an open subscription; hence, there was no limit to the group population.

In the planning phase, a snowball sampling technique was started by a random sample of 54 wheat farmers from the two villages. Joining the CoP was open, and other farmers were encouraged to participate. The extension agent in each village shared his mobile contact list with the group, which represented the bulk of the VCoP.

As a result, the population of farmer’s fluctuated throughout the study period. Table 1 shows the final population in July 2023, at the end of the season.

Table 1 The study population at the end of the wheat season

3.4 Interventions

The general assumption of the study was to introduce an extension intervention in the free and common environment. The intervention simply supports the community of practice in the village through the use of a social media application. This approach allows participants to share knowledge freely, feel ownership of their virtual community, and allows day–to–day problems to easily surface away from any formal consideration.

The technical intervention of the campaign included new wheat varieties, some subsidized inputs and a GAP package. Extension methods of the campaign traditionally depend on DF, farmer meetings, a limited number of printed wheat bulletins, a field day, and a harvest day. On-demand extension agents or researchers are available all the time, yet field visits are to be arranged in critical cases. To ensure that all the other variables were equal, no interference was made to the normal campaign interventions when introducing the extension intervention, i.e., the VCoP.

3.5 The intervention planning stage

The planning stage started in mid-November 2022 before the wheat season and took two weeks, started by field coordination and lasting until the formation and launching of the two VCoP groups. The study started with formal coordination at the governorate, district and village levels, and included selecting Meet Habib village (504 wheat farmers) and Meet Hamal village (1067 wheat farmers) [23].

The baseline survey in the two villages revealed the following:

Table 2 shows that the respondents' ages ranged between 26 and 80 years, with almost half being over 60 years old. Most of those respondents were highly literate, as nearly two-thirds of them passed high school. Agriculture was the only job of a quarter of the respondents, while having a side job was common among others, yet the planted area was mostly in small plots with fewer than 5 feddans. Although four-fifths of the respondents had a high level of experience in growing wheat, exceeding 20 years, the average production of wheat per feddan varied among them, yet one-third of them reached greater production of more than 20 Ardab/feddan, which might indicate that professional knowledge moves very slowly among them.

Table 2 The respondents’ ages

The survey showed that 72.2% of the farmers owned smartphones. Farmers using WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram, Telegram, and YouTube applications. The percentages of farmers using these applications were 50%, 29.6%, 5.6%, 1.9%, and 11.1%, respectively. The seven input dealers used WhatsApp, while 6 of them used Facebook. The main criteria for selecting the application were its popularity among farmers, lowest cost possible, and user friendliness with suitable privacy, ease of control by an administrator and ease of linking with external information sources. Based on that, the WatsApp application was selected.

Additionally during this stage, mastery of the extension intervention of the study was assigned to the extension agent who was the master of the process (group administrator). The chief researcher of the national campaign for wheat and his team assumed the role of mastering the technical innovation, while the study team was the master of learning, development, rule observer and enforcer.

No rules were set to control interactions when the group was formed according to the existing social norms in the village’s conservative community. This approach was used to detect real problems by allowing participants to express their needs and encourage them to share their opinions openly, yet with close monitoring from the study team.

This stage endured by a one-day training session was conducted with the 2 village extension agents. The training included the introduction of digital extensions, facilitation, and the technology broker role; the discovery of needed information on the internet; communication patterns; ways to encourage cooperation among farmers; ways to select CoP members; and monitoring and follow-up activities.

3.6 Unfolding the intervention

The cyclical process of intervention unfolding or action intervention in VCoP1 and VcoP2 went smoothly for a few days until the members were acquainted with the rules and ease of handling the application. The study team tried to support joining the VCoP, yet all the farmers refused to share their private WhatsApp group or contact lists. This might mean that these groups include their private life details. No professional groups (VCoPs) were found in either village. Traders also rejected sharing their groups, but some of them shared some contacts.

An obstacle surfaced in the first month as the advertisement uploaded by traders and company agents which created a conflict of interest between traders themselves. Researchers also rejected advertising to avoid being accused of bias and implicitly agreeing with traders' wrong recommendations, which could harm their reputation. The advertisement was also rejected by some farmers, who saw that it deviated the group from its extension purpose. The researchers took a stand and withdrew from the groups. In a meeting between the study's principal investigator, the chief researcher of the campaign, and the director of the digital extension of the campaign, a compromise was reached to restrict the upload of any advertisements. Traders and company agents respected this rule, and researchers rejoined the communities.

Another problem was raised when the extension agent erased some messages from farmers and traders, but the study team explained the aim of the experiment to him, i.e., to simulate the natural environment to encourage all members to interact freely. No messages have been deleted ever since.

When limited access to the meetings, the DF, wheat bulletins, farmer field schools, and other extension activities were noticed, the study team worked to upload information about these activities to the application. To avoid overloading more data on members’ mobile memory, YouTube was used to upload video records and share the links in the application. The printed copy of the wheat bulletin was scanned and uploaded on free Google sites and shared in the application. Meanwhile, researchers asked farmers to shoot the field/crop in case of a problem. They also afford to pay field visits in critical cases. The same offer was made by a company agent for free. In addition, GAPs of climate information, and alerts were regularly uploaded to the VCoP by the director of the digital extension of the campaign and the principal investigator.

There was no vertical link between VCoP1 and VCoP2 (no messages exchanged between groups), although researchers and extension agents were common members of both groups. The extension agent could not make this link; hence, the study team and the director of the digital extension of the campaign took charge of this responsibility.

Only one violation of the ethical rules was detected in VCoP1 when a trader posted an unrelated message to attract attention. He claimed equity in advertisement publication. The problem was solved after advertising was restricted.

3.7 Statistical tools

The statistical tools used in the study were frequencies, percentages, means, and average scores.

For presenting distributions, a 2D column and radar graph were selected using an MS Office Excel sheet.

4 Results

4.1 The acting stage

The acting stage was initiated by launching the VCoP in both villages in December 2022 and lasted until mid-June 2023, covering the whole wheat season.

4.1.1 Information sharing features of the VCoP

4.1.1.1 Development of participants’ numbers in VCoPs’

The group was always open to anyone who wanted to join or leave, but removal was not allowed except by the principal investigator for study purposes. No participant was removed throughout the season because all critical situations were compromised and friendly.

Figures 1 and 2 illustrate that the majority of participants were added by the extension agents as informants. The extension agent’s contact lists in both villages were added unfiltered, which caused the withdrawal of some of the added persons within a few days. Reasons such as irrelevance to the person’s profession or not being in his or her interest justified the departure. Extension agents gave some reasons to justify farmers’ refusal to join the VCoP, such as having insufficient information about the VCoP, not having smartphones, avoiding conflict with others, having a shortage of spare time, and being bored of too many messages. The percentage of persons who left to the added members was 47.5% in VCoP1 and 44.75% in VCoP 2.

Fig. 1

Progressive number of participants in VCoP 1. Content analysis data

Fig. 2

Progressive number of participants in VCoP 2. Content analysis data

4.1.1.2 Messages exchanged by participants’ categories

Table 3 shows that although VCoP 1 members were more active than VCoP 2 members were, the percentages of the messages of farmers and extension agents were very close. While researchers were active in VCoP 2, traders were more active in VCoP 1. This might be a defensive attitude from researchers against the attempt made by traders to dominate VcoP 1 at the beginning of the season. After coordination was established by the study team, the researchers and traders were satisfied with the rules of restricting advertisements, which were also welcomed by the farmers.

Table 3 Messages exchanged by VCoP members during the season

4.1.1.3 Types of messages

Table 4 shows that technical messages surpassed other types in both VCoPs, which is considered a good indicator showing that participants could adapt to the goal of the VCoP easily. Social messages ranked second but at a higher percentage in VCoP 1. Social messages create a friendly atmosphere among group members, especially when participants have personal relationships. This might explain the higher percentage of social messages in VCoP1, as the participants represented almost one-quarter of the wheat farmers in the village, contrary to VCoP2, in which participants represented almost one-fifth of the population.

Table 4 Types of messages exchanged during the season

4.1.1.4 Technical messages’ objective

Analysis of the technical messages revealed that, regardless of the number of participants in the VCoP, the percentages of messages in each category were very close for both VCoPs Table 5. The recommendation objectives topped other objectives in posted messages. Recommendations were often the concern of the extension agent, the research team, and the study team. Most of these recommendations depend on external sources, which emphasizes that the CoP needs to be fed with information from external sources.

Table 5 Objectives of technical messages exchanged during the season

4.1.2 VCoP communication features as an extension method indicated by media used

Different media were used with mobile applications including text, images, audio, video, and external links with internet sites. The study team took the initiative to link events of the campaign to the application, such as meetings, bulletins and the DF. The study team tried to use the minimum cost to deal with media such as mobile facilities, free PC applications, YouTube and Google free sites [24]. Table 6 shows that all the media were used in both VCoPs but at different rates. Participants commonly used text messages and images easily, but audio, video and internet links were seldom used. Shooting video and linking with internet sites requires special skills to be trained, even for the study team. Uploading videos on YouTube and scanning the wheat bulletin and uploading it on a Google free space were used to avoid memory draining of participants’ mobile sets.

Table 6 Media used to convey messages in the VCoP

4.2 The reflecting stage

This sage depended on participant opinions about the effect of the extension intervention identified through the final assessment questionnaire.

4.2.1 Productivity

Although this is not solid evidence of the impact of the VCoP, according to respondents, their average productivity increased from 16.68 in the last season to 18.5 in the Ardab/Feddan season, i.e., 10.91%.

4.2.2 Information usefulness

A comparison of the posted technical information and its perceived usefulness in Fig. 3 reveals similarities in the ranking order. This indicates that perceived usefulness is proportional to knowledge exchange within the VCoP. This is one of the main advantages of the CoP according to social learning theory [25].

Fig. 3

Source of VCoP 1 and VCoP2 data: Content analysis data. Source of usefulness data: final assessment data

Rank comparison of posted messages and farmers perception of its usefulness.

4.2.3 Respondents’ satisfaction eith the media used in the VCoP

Figure 4 illustrates respondents’ satisfaction with the media used in the VCoP. Respondents appreciated the suitability of all types of media equally. Most of them found that only video messages and internet links were rarely used and still need more elaboration.

Fig. 4

Participants’ assessment of the media mix used in the VCoP. Final assessment data

Only one extension agent out of the 5 thinks that the VCoP can cover his extension tasks. Other agents said that the VCoP complements extension meetings, field visits, DF, and bulletins.

4.2.4 VCoP reach compared to that of other extension methods

In contrast to other extension methods traditionally used in the campaign, the VCoP could easily have a foothold among other communication methods. The VCoP reach was high in the studied villages, as 112 out of the 504 wheat farmers in Meet Habib village had a VCoP members representing 22.22% of wheat farmers, while in Meet Hamal, 111 out of 1067 were VCoP members, representing 10.40% of the total number of wheat farmers in the village [26].

In the final assessment, only 5 farmers (8.33% of the sample) knew that there was a DF in the village, while only two of them could describe its correct location. The percentages of respondents who were engaged in extension meetings, held wheat bulletins, attended field days, and attended harvest days reached 25%, 23.33%, 8.33%, and 8.33%, respectively. VCoP has another unique feature as a semipersonal method available all the time, unlike most extension methods, meaning that it is more selective. The content analysis revealed that the peak time to use the application ranged between 5:00 PM and 9:00 PM, which is more suitable for farmers than for those attending extension meetings, farmer field schools, or visiting the DF.

4.2.5 Social relations in the VCoP

Social relations uniquely enhanced interactions in the local VCoP. It supported trust, confidence, and a friendly atmosphere in the group. Social messages came second after technical messages in the content analysis data of VCoP1 and VCoP2, at percentages of 35.34% and 17.53%, respectively. The final assessment showed that 63.33% of the respondents admitted that the group helped them make new relationships with others. The results also show that 43.33%, 38.33%, 30%, and 20% of the farmers had new relationships with other village extension agents, extension staff in the district, researchers of the national campaign, and other researchers, respectively. This might also mean that the rest of the sample respondents are already acquainted with those persons in the actual community of practice.

Farmers indicated that they trust the solutions of extension workers (38.33%) and even consult them to ensure that the information is correct (50%). Although the researchers are more experienced, personal relations have made extension workers more trustworthy from the viewpoint of farmers. Social relations can support maintening ethical rules in the group, as indicated by 88.33% of the respondents. Four of the 5 extension workers elect one of them to control ethical rules in the CoPs based on his good relationships and reputation.

4.2.6 Cross-border information sharing

A collateral impact of information-out appeared when 47 of the respondents (78.33%) said that they conveyed some messages to other farmers outside their VCoP. Table (shows that respondents consulted external persons in addition to the VCoP members in all aspects, which means that information-in occurs, although occasionally. The personal experience that was mentioned by farmers indicates that knowledge is generated in the CoP and that farmers themselves are a source of information shared in the group.

4.2.7 VCoP scale-out possibilities

Table 7 reveals that, while 11 respondents invited 127 friends to join the group, 43 of them became members, which means that a CoP can grow naturally. Nevertheless, scaling up VCoP depends on many factors, such as awareness, concrete benefits, and sociability, which were beyond the scope of the study. Nevertheless, including other stakeholders might help attract other farmers to join the VCoP Table 7.

Table 7 Persons whom farmers consult over the VCoP border

Table 8 shows that participants expressed their need to engage 14 different stakeholders; most of whom are players in the value supply chain.

Table 8 Stakeholders suggested by participants to join the VCoP

Tracing the group sustainability showed that all members continued using the application after the wheat season was over. Questions and queries for rice and other summer crops were posted by farmers, while extension agents started to post announcements and informative messages about summer crops. The problem was different from that of researchers, as summer crops were out of their specialty, and their assigned tasks for the national campaign were over. This revealed that the study was designed for a limited period, while the intervention had a more prolonged effect. Farmers in Egypt under intensive agricultural conditions have crop rotations; i.e., they plant more than one crop annually. This means that their CoP is not around a crop but rather around the profession, which should be considered when designing a VCoP.

4.2.8 VCoP potential to support administrative work

The integration of administrative work in VCoP functions was beyond the scope of the study, and no action was designed to promote this topic. In the VCoP, while technical and social interactions were common, exchanging administrative messages was weak. Only 4 farmers (6.67%) reported that the group helped them with official paperwork, and 16 farmers (26.67%) said they knew the dates of supply distribution through the group. All extension agents indicated that all documents exchanged with the upper level are still on paper. Almost all of them indicated that they used the VCoP to post regulations about the new varieties allowed to be planted in the area, announcing the availability of seeds in the cooperative, announcing the timing of releasing farmers’ quotas for fertilizers and pesticides, facilitating the announcement of regulations and instructions from the upper level, and presenting the crop status regularly.

4.2.9 Evidence of multiservice providers’ adaptation to VCoP rules

The provision and sharing of information within the VCoP under study relied on various stakeholders, such as researchers from the Agricultural Research Center, extension agents from the Ministry of Agriculture, private sector traders, company agents, and farmers themselves. However, conflicts of interest often arise due to differing goals, approaches, and sources among these multiple service providers. The farmers perceived the relationships between these parties as convenient but also biased and conflicting. Table 9 shows the details of this perception.

Table 9 Farmers’ perceptions of the relations among multiservice providers

Figure 5 shows that farmers expect more cooperation than conflict among different parties, and bias is not a significant concern. This feeling of satisfaction may be due to the coordination efforts made by the study team at the start of the VCoP action. This is a positive indication that the plural extension approach can be implemented successfully at the grassroots level. When farmers were asked if their membership in the VCoP was useful, 61.67% of them agreed. However, some farmers who disagreed that traders only work for their own benefit, exploit the information they receive from the group, and prioritize marketing their own goods.

Fig. 5

Farmers perception of the relations among multi service providers. Final assessment data

Resolving conflicts in the VCoP was appointed to the extension agent, as seen by 36.67% of famers and only one of the company agents. Among those who thought that researchers were more capable of resolving conflicts were 11.67% of the farmers, all 5 extension agents, and 5 of the 6 traders/company agents. This debate puts this contradictory result in question, and additional research is needed.

5 Discussion

The introduction of an innovative extension method such as the VCoP would start by describing its features and effects, highlighting its advantages over other methods. Superficially, VCoP is a simple method for using social media in extension, yet its roots depend on a combination of four concepts: community of practice, social media, social learning theory, and pluralistic extension. The technical action research design was followed to put the VCoP into action and explore its profile. The study revealed that the number of participants is dynamic, but grows larger depending on its flexible administration and usefulness. This feature is supported by the scale-out results that showed the need for the participants to expand their membership to include other stakeholders.

An important feature of the VCoP is information sharing by multiple stakeholders. The results revealed that posted information was perceived as useful. This is supported by the results that reveal that information-in and information-out channels are open in the group. There was a convenient balance between technical and social messages as the results revealed that participants perceived the different functions of each. Regarding the communication features, the VCoP was suitable for containing all types of media including links to external information sources; this makes it flexible for participants to use suitable media, as the results showed participants’ satisfaction with this variation in using media.

VCoP had higher reach than the other methods used by participants. Theoretically, VCoP exceeds farmer field schools in reach, but not in terms of costs and hands-on training. Mass media would gain much reach, but without close and social interaction the VCoP could be maintained.

Pluralistic extension is rarely discussed at the community level. The study revealed that farmers appreciate multisource information with some suitable coordination among stakeholders. This will make it easy for farmers to detect information conflicts and consult trusted sources.

In principle, the VCoP proved to be a good option for working with all stakeholders at the village level, yet more studies are still needed to explore its scaling up potentials regarding its connection to the strategic plan or levels of coordination.

6 Conclusion

The potential of the community of practice has not been identified in extension work in Egypt. With the capabilities of virtual social networks, VCoP might work as an extension method to reach more grassroots farmers, especially as the use of smart mobile devices is rapidly spreading among them. Based on the general indicators revealed by the study, the following initial features of a VCoP can be suggested:

• A VCoP as an extension method can be utilized in Egypt in a mixed CoP model that includes farmers and other service providers in an open boarder environment.

• VCoP can be used as a stand-alone extension method for generating and sharing information but not as a substitute for other methods.

• The extension agent is the key to establishing and managing the VCoP. Although an opinion leader or an NGO can take the lead, this might compromise the commitment of formal research and extension.

• Unlike other extension methods, the VCoP is not a one-shot program; rather, it has unique potential for natural sustainability.

• Farmers preferred to make the VCoP a one-stop shop that includes all supply chain parties as well as formal bodies of the secondary value chain.

• The VCoP should have access to external sources of information. This responsibility could be assigned to extension researchers at related research stations after they are qualified.

• The VCoP can be a part of plural extension or innovation platform approaches at the grassroots level. Although this requires a different kind of coordination, the indicators suggest that it is promising.

• Scaling up needs additional research regarding the number of participants, variety of participants, VCoP administration, coordination mechanisms and agreements, especially when expanding beyond the village border. The village CoP is a part of its social community where people know each other, but the study revealed, for instance, that farmers need to know more service providers outside the village.

• With suitable styles of training, technical and extension researchers, extension agents and cooperative managers, company agents, etc., and other stakeholders should be acquainted with their respective roles.

• Extension events in the village should be focused upon and linked to the VCoP on time.

Appendices

Appendix

Operational definitions

Messages posted in the VCoP: The number of text, sound, photo, image or video messages, carrying a single idea, posted by a participant during the study span.

Technical messages: the number of messages with content related to agricultural processes.

Social messages: the number of messages related to friendly relationships among participants, e.g., congratulations, condolences, etc.

Administrative messages: Number of messages related to formal activities.

Informational messages: Number of messages about announcements, advertising, or referring to an action taken or will be taken.

Recommendation messages: the number of messages that recommends a practice or a solution related to agriculture by any participant.

Query messages: the number of messages seeking any kind of information that is not necessarily a problem. A query often has one answer.

Discussion messages: Number of posted messages are that exchanged in a thread related to an idea or an opinion that usually has more than one viewpoint.

Awareness messages: Number of alert or warning messages to take prior caution.

Informative messages: Number of messages aiming to spread news or describe an event.

Request messages: Number of friendly messages encouraging to-do or not-to-do something.

Farmers’ satisfaction with the media used in the VCoP: This was measured in a phone interview by asking farmers a yes/no question about the suitability of the type of messages used text, sound, video, photos/images and links to external sources of information.

Farmers’ perceptions of the relationships among multiservice providers: This was measured via a phone interview by asking farmers about their expectations about the relationships among researchers, extension agents, traders, and company agents whether they will be cooperating, biased, or conflicting.

Farmers’ perceptions of the usefulness of posted technical messages: This was measured in a phone interview by asking farmers about the usefulness of information posted about: variety selection, planting method, irrigation, fertilization, pest and disease control, weed control, harvest, and marketing. Scores of 3,2, and 1 were assigned to the levels of high, moderate and low usefulness respectively. The scale total score ranged between 180 and 60 degrees, and the average degree was calculated by dividing the total score by 60 (n).

Cross-border information sharing: Cross-border information is any information exchanged with non-group members during the season, i.e., information-out and information-in. Information-out was measured by asking the respondents of the final assessment study about the number of non-group members who conveyed any information gained in the VCoP. Information-in was measured by asking the respondent about the source of information he or she used to gain different types of information during his or her time of membership.

Respondents’ satisfaction with the media used in the VCoP: This was measured vie a phone interview in which farmers were asked yes/no questions about whether they were satisfied with the types of media used. When the participants were not satisfied, they were asked about how to make it better.