gain adoption of known technology was needed. This
misreading of evidence is no doubt one of the major
reasons most university development programs have
had a strong bias toward concentration of invest-
ments in extension activities as opposed to basic or
applied research [18].
Perhaps, there are two basic research philosophies
relevant to international agriculture development.
The one school of thought would suggest that re-
searchers are most productive if permitted and
encouraged to follow individual interests and leads.
The other would suggest that given limited funds, cer-
tainly typical of the underdeveloped world, research
should be mission-oriented or mission-directed. Under
this philosophy, objectives would be established and
research specifically designed to remove impediments
to the attainment of the stated objectives [3].
There is considerable evidence to suggest that
agricultural research activities in South America tend
to be remarkably similar to current activities in the
USA. Some have characterized this phenomena as
North Americanization of South America research.
This is not surprising in view of the emphasis on the
USA for graduate education. However, one would be
surprised if mission-oriented research on the two
continents would lead to similar projects and ap-
proaches,
One observer of the Colombian scene has sug-
gested that most of the com producers in Colombia
utilize primitive techniques often on rather low
quality soil. Yet, there have been numerous field days
demonstrating improved corn production methods
for large-scale producers but no field days empha-
sizing improved production technology for small-scale
TABLE 1. SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF STAFF AND FORMER STAFF,
Masua-Nebraska Colombian projects as of December 3i, 1969
Item Number
GeneralInformation
Employed ................. -∙50
Returned ................. .20
Three Months or More Previous International Experience ...................24
Served Two Years or Less in Colombia...................∙ ∙ ........20
Previous Staff Position
MAsUAInstitutions . . .......... . . ................. 21
With Leave ................... . (13)
Nebraska .......... . ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
With Leave ........ (4)1
OtherUniversities.............. . . ............... . . . . . . . .11
Other(IncludingGraduateSchool)........ . . . . .18
Total 50
Source: University of Nebraska, Office of International Programs.
1IncludedinMASUAfigures.
72