The efficacy of technique is contingent on the confidence invested in it by the practitioner. Technique supplied from an external source carries with it much social and psychological baggage. It may run up against traditional modes of behaviour that the recipient is not prepared to easily abandon, or it may simply not be workable in a given local context. Most of all, it may not be trusted.
The absence of training in or use of technical skills in a village promotes distrust of technological services except in the form of consumer products. Modern methods are uninvestigated, even though practical benefits, such as more productive crops from using modern fertilizing methods, would result. This technological handicap is manifest in other ways: land records go unresearched; commercial and agricultural services available in the area are basically unused; soil testing and agricultural waste disposal advice are unsolicited; and nearby veterinary services are largely ignored. Modern human health services are used on a minimal basis: dental care has a low priority and illness is often treated only when curative care is imperative.
Confidence in new methods can only emanate from the willed participation of the practitioners. Effective communication of new ways is not achieved by simply overcoming community-level resistance to externally-supplied methods, but by finding ways to facilitate the generation of appropriate technique from the community itself. The role of community organizations in this process is pivotal because information received from external sources will always be filtered through a community perception. At the same time the community will be less threatened by external knowledge that has arrived through a collective filter.